Chris Goodwin

Flare not withstanding, 
 
that's a damned impressive display of memory right there!  
 

Points don't create magic items.  Points are a representation of how powerful your character is.  You don't have to spend points to make items, but no matter what you do your point total can't exceed the campaign limits.  You can make a +5 Vorpal Longsword of Asswhooping according to whatever the ritual is required in the story, but you can't keep it for yourself until you've got points available.  Otherwise it would make you more powerful than the campaign allows.
 
Independent should represent that the item is not a part of the character -- it can be used by them, but there's no "plot immunity" that ensures it will stick around.  One failed Str check, a failed saving throw, a sneaky thief, and it's gone.  Easy come, easy go.
 
I kind of like the idea that magic items can come about from a number of sources.  Suppose Bob the fighter goes out on an adventure with his trusty brand new longsword.  And the first thing he encounters is an orc, guarding a chest.  Bob runs forward and rolls to hit.  Rolls a 3, hits easily.  Location 3, hitting the orc in the unarmored head.  Rolls damage and instant-kills the guy.  Hey that's cool.  Great job Bob.  And now let's suppose that the next time Bob encounters an orc, he does it again.  This time he hits the orc in the vitals, but it's still one hit, one kill.  And then the third time Bob encounters an orc, he instant kills him again.  Bob just really seems to have good luck killing orcs with that sword.  Well once it happens often enough that players start commenting on it, maybe the GM decides that this might be a Sword of Orc Slaying.  The magic of the world has infused itself into the weapon, Bob has awoken the blade's inner spirit, or some other such nonsense.  The important thing is that it makes sense in the story that this is actually a powerful orc killing sword.  Bob's now got the option to upgrade the sword, no wizard required.

Sorry for disappearing there for awhile. Just had a bunch of stuff going on that got in the way of other stuff. Hopefully it shan't happen again.

I'm out of reactions for the day.  Someone tag Duke for me!

I do not use any "divide by X" system for the cost of magic spells.  You pay full price.  I do allow frameworks, in the following ways:  A multipower is for an individual spell that has multiple applications, like an Earth-Shaping spell which can be used to set up a physical Barrier, or can be used to Entangle a foe.  You can't just put your Invisibility, Detect Magic, Mind Control, Heal Wounds, Mystic Blast, and Animal Friendship spells into one Multipower just because you're a wizard and you want to save points.  VPPs are available to put all your spells in if you want, but there has to be some restrictions on switching the slots around - like to have to spend a few hours studying your spellbook.  You can't just change to any spell you want on the fly.  And usually all the spells have to be pre-defined.  Usually, you can't just make up some new spell you've never cast before.  And these things are usually only used by more powerful wizards.  A lower-powered wizard might have a half-dozen spells, each with only one possible application.  With some experience, they may turn one or more of them into a multipower to be able to do more than one thing with a given spell.  Or they may add whole new spells, but put them in a VPP so they can only access a half-dozen of them at any given time.
 
In general, I really dislike the deendee model of wizard as walking artillery platforms.  If you want to kill something, go ahead and use a sword or a bow.  Magic is for things you can't do with weapons.  And yes, mage-type characters have full access to the use of weapons and armor, like any other character.  And fighter-types can purchase spells if they want.  I use what I sometimes call a "low-wide" magic system.  Magic is pretty common, and everyone could potentially buy magic spells or abilities (though not everyone does, of course).  But magic is not particularly flashy, but usually more utilitarian.  "Fireball"-type spells are pretty rare, and almost always come with serious restrictions on their use - especially if they're significantly more powerful than the weapons you can buy for money.  Powerful spells - even directly damaging combat spells - are possible, but since you're paying full price for them, it may leave you with not enough points for other things you might want for a character with a good chance at surviving.

If I ever get the chance, I definitely want to expand a bit on Chaos Blades -- how the setting and its magic works and whatnot. Not a full book or anything like that, more like an article. Or a chapter in a larger book.

Had a really long-running Western /Occult years ago.  I don't know quite how we got there-- I think it was one player wanting to be able to call upon Totems and they have an actual-- if very tiny-- effect.  It sort of grew from there, and we played it for a bit over four years.  Magic, Spirits, the occult, voodoo, shamans, spirits, creatures of legend, demons, possession, and the aftermath of the Civil War--
 
all kinds of neat things in the end.  Happened on accident, we all loved it, and I don't think we could re-create it if we _tried_.  
 
 
 

I have little issue with multiple races.  I have to wonder why it's always the _same_ multiple races. 

THANK YOU! 
 
Thank you so very much! 
 
Not something I am pointing at TA about, but at the vast majority of fantasy games and settings, etc.  If I wanted Tolkien, I'd play MERP.  If I wanted &D&D, I'd play that. 
 
 
And thanks again. 

Thanx for the kind words, folx! It's always great to hear that people enjoy what I've written.
 
While I definitely don't have time to tackle any book-length works related to TA, the next time I get the itch to do a little Fantasy work in and around researching MYTHIC HERO and whatnot, perhaps I can come up a group of bad guys, or an unusual cult, or something else fun for TA.
 
 
Hmmm -- I am not familiar with these. I will have to check 'em out, since I've enjoyed the four or five of her "Miles Vorkosigan" books that I've read. Thanx for the suggestion!

Yeah requiring points creates a sense of importance and sacrifice, it makes items dear.  Kind of like how if you give someone something valuable, they'll like you, but if they buy something valuable, they'll be very careful with the item.  Well, usually.
 
I think there's value in the concept, which is why in the Jolrhos Field Guide, I require people making magic items to have the points to spend, but if the item is destroyed, lost, disenchanted, etc they get the points back in some manner or another so nothing is ever truly lost.  Its a barrier to creation and a way of making the items dear to a magic item creator, but not a permanent loss of points.  And there are ways of lowering the point cost.

I have no problem with characters starting with magic items that they've paid points for.
 
I would never make a player pay points for a magic item he happened to find and wants to use.  However, there's a good chance that that item will eventually be taken away.  Lost, stolen, broken, whatever.  The GM giveth and the GM taketh away.  Blessed be the name of the GM.
 
If a player buys a magic item (or any ability at all) with the Independent limitation, he WILL lose it eventually, and he will NOT get those points back.  Because (say it with me now) A Limitation that isn't Limiting doesn't provide any point savings!  And I make sure my players know this in advance.  And as a result, no player of mine has ever applied the Independent limitation to anything they've bought, at least as far as I can recall.
 
If a player buys a magic item (or any ability at all) with the Focus limitation, he WILL lose it occasionally.  But he can recover it, or build a new one, or otherwise acquire a new one, or he can get the points back to spend on something else.
 
If a player buys a magic item (or any ability at all) without Focus and without Independent, he can use it freely any time he wants (subject to whatever other limitations it might have), and he will never lose it unless he chooses to rebuild his character somehow (usually requiring some in-game justification).
 
If Alice paid 20 points for a magic weapon, and Bob just happens to find a magic weapon worth 20 points, well good for Bob, but he probably won't have it forever, while Alice will.  Meanwhile, Alice is just as likely to find another magic item as Bob, maybe a magic shield or some other useful magic item.   If Bob starts whining about losing his magic sword that he found and never paid for, then Bob needs a time-out.  The 20 points Alice paid are part of her character.  Anything you didn't pay points for is not part of your character.
 
In my games, magic items are very, very rare.  And magic weapons and armor are even rarer.  If you want a magic sword as part of your character that does 2d6 HKA with +2 Skill levels, then that's 34-40 Active points (limit to taste), which must be paid for (after limitations).  But if you want a big non-magical sword that does 2d6, you can buy it for money - no points, and if you want, you can buy two skill levels.  Or you could buy for points a magic Amulet of Swordsmanship that gives you +2 Skill Levels with swords for only 10 Active points (limit to taste) and pay a lot less in real points.  In my games, magic weapons and armor are very very very rare, in part because they are a rather inefficient use of character points.  Why spend points on a magic weapon that's only a little bit better than the mundane weapon you can buy for money?  If you want a magic item, buy a cloak of invisibility, or boots of swift running, or a necklace of animal friendship, or a hat of the pure mind (Mental Defense).  In my games magic is for things you can't do with mundane items.
 
And there may be some magic items in my games that "take themselves away" eventually - limited use items, like potions that have only a few uses before they run out.  And such an item could even be a weapon, like a magic exploding pine cone - when you throw it into the midst of your enemies, it explodes for a nice amount of damage - but of course, you can only use it once.  And it's perfectly OK if you want to pay your own points for the ability to make more potions or exploding pine cones.

Okay. Folks. 
Your friendly neighborhood moderator here.
I've had a request to lock this thread down. And I can see why. There's no rule against down voting someone, but we do have a stance against insulting or 'attacking' individuals (As opposed to disagreeing or debating what they say) and we're definitely crossing dangerously close to that. I'm not pointing fingers. But it does look at this point that we're getting into some circular arguments at best, and at worse, about to have some needless build up of personal hostility that can dim fun on all sides.
 
I'm not going to pretend I'm above that myself. We've all gone down that rabbit hole. But my advice, trite as it is, is if you're getting riled, back off from the thread. It doesn't mean you've conceded defeat or any such thing.  If it's gotten to a point where side X is in this camp, and Side Y is in that camp, and they're never going to agree, then you're no longer really sharing opposing views, you're trying to collect points from those that already agree with you  (And maybe 'show up' the other side) and that's a waste of our time too.
 
Apologies for the scattershot speech, sometimes  innocents get caught in the 'lecture fire', and I certainly don't intend that. But right now, this thread seems almost the opposite of productive given how negative it has twisted into. 
 
However, seeing posts that admit this has become something of a flame war, or questions from folk wondering what we're even talking about after four pages, makes me realize more than one of you agrees this thread has become circular and hostile... though the reasons WHY or 'who is to blame' may vary. Instead of assigning blame. I'm going to take put this thread out of its misery.
 
You're free to start a new again, fresh and clean if you like, and please bear my concerns in mind if you do. I can't claim to 'know' all of you but most on this thread I've seen for years on these boards and I've a respect for a lot of you but we all have our bad days, or 'well that escalated quickly' situations. I hope that's all this whole thing is, collectively speaking
 
 
If anybody disagrees with the locking of the thread, feel free to PM Simon, I am but a lowly mod.
 
 

This is definitely something the GM will have to consider.  If characters can pay points to start with magic items, but don't have to pay points to keep ones that are found, I would suggest that fairness would dictate that those who paid points to start with them should get those points back.  Alice, a 200 point archer who has spent 20 of her starting points on the Bow of Projectiles, and Bob, a 200 point fighter who has found the 20-point Axe of Spikiness, should both be considered, effectively, 220 point characters.  
 
I would suggest that Alice gets to "withdraw" the points she's paid for the bow, at the same rate as she receives XP.  In other words, if she receives 3 XP for the session, then she should get 3 of her spent points back from the bow, at the same time.  Those wouldn't be considered XP; they would be a cost reduction applied to the bow's cost, which would reduce her total points.  Assuming the point in the campaign at which both have received a total of 20 XP, that would make Bob a 200 point character with a 20 point axe and 20 XP, and Alice a 180 total point character, with a max of 200 points (leaving her 20 points unspent) and 20 XP.  If she later spends her unspent points from the bow, she would then be at the same point level as Bob: a 200 total point character with a 20 point bow and 20 XP.  
 
 
If both the bow and the axe have the Obvious Accessible Focus Limitation, they should have equal chances of losing their weapons.  In the event Alice loses her bow, she would get the entire 20 points back at once that she spent on it (or whatever she hasn't gotten back through reimbursement as above); if Bob spent no points on his axe, he would have nothing to get back if he loses it.  
 
 
If they both have a -1 OAF Limitation... getting a Focus taken away is part of that.  Neither of them should be angry, and whether one or the other gets taken away shouldn't be based on whether it's fair that Alice has paid points and Bob hasn't.  If Alice's bow gets taken away (assuming it can't be recovered), Alice should get those points back, at least whatever she hasn't already gotten back as mentioned above.
 
 
That would be "loss prevention" for the points, true.  Assuming you're using Independent in your games (the general "you"), would you allow a character to regain their lost points by buying off the Independent Limitation on a lost item?  I absolutely would.  But I'd require the character to front the difference.  If a 20-point item had a cost of 12 points with the Independent Limitation, meaning the character paid 12 points for it, then at the time at which they were able to spend the 8 points to buy off the Independent Limitation, they'd get the full 20 points back.  But they'd have to have the 8 XP first.  In case it's not obvious, I've been assuming throughout the thread that Independent is not in use.
 
By the way, it's always been a rule that in order to have a magic item (weapon or otherwise), you have to pay for the entire thing, not just the cost difference between the mundane and magical versions, even if you would otherwise not pay points for the mundane version.  GM's option, to be sure, but it's the default RAW.

If you assume that your total points are a measure of your power level and not a "currency" then it... hopefully? ... makes more sense.  
 
If Bob the Fighter above finds a magic sword, compare that to, for instance, Batman picking up a bad guy's tommy gun.  (Old school Batman.  Older, even.)  He might use it to cover the bad guys; he might fire a burst to rip up a getaway car's tire.  If he really thinks he needs to end someone, he might very well do it with that gun.  Next issue?  He's probably forgotten all about it.  If, on the other hand, the writer has decided that he likes the idea of Batman carrying around a tommy gun, and he has it next issue, then that's when we consider Batman to have "spent the points" to carry a tommy gun.  
 
If Bob the Fighter doesn't spend the points, then his ability to keep and use the magic sword is entirely up to the GM.  If he spends the points, then... to be honest, it's still up to the GM, but if afterward he loses the sword, he should either have a chance to get the sword back, or he should get the points back.  (Or maybe part of its magical properties are that it finds its way back to him.  The Focus Limitation gives plenty of ideas that can be adapted to this.)  
 
Consider also this.  With GM permission, Bob could begin the game carrying a magic sword, if he paid the points for it (maybe it's an heirloom handed down from his grandfather, Robertus).  Or, once he has some saved up XP and decides he wants a magic sword, he could say to the GM:  "I'm going to find an enchanter and commission a magic sword."  Or even, "Hey GM, I'd like to acquire a magic sword soon, and I've got some XP saved up..." and leave it up to the GM how you get it.  You could assume, if you wish, that spending the points on a magic item "attunes" you to it the way it does in D&D 5e (and maybe you have to spend an hour studying it, getting a feel for it, and so on, in order to spend the points and to attune with it).  That's how it becomes part of your character sheet rather than just another piece of equipment.  
 
There's sort of an unwritten rule in Fantasy Hero going back decades that "there shouldn't be assembly lines of mages turning out +1 swords by the bucketful" or similar.  There have been rules in previous editions to enforce that,; there used to be a Limitation to the effect that the points you spend on the item are bound into it permanently, but they sort of turn those points into a permanently spendable currency rather than a meta-level measure of power.  It also threw problems when, for instance, that fighter PC wanted to go to an enchanter and commission a magic sword -- technically, the enchanter paid their points, permanently, in that case, so the fighter would still have a magic sword without paying points for it.  That also led to silliness such as having special, magical materials, that the enchanter might send you on a quest for, that had character points embedded in them, that the enchanter could use to build the sword with.  Which certainly matches up with some source material, where the enchanter sends you on a quest in order to gain the magic sword, but... doesn't really solve the problem we're talking about.  The best way to solve the "assembly lines of magic items" "problem" is for the GM to say no, there aren't assembly lines of magic items in this world.  (And if the GM wants a magic item rich world?  It's easy enough for the GM to say yes instead of no.)  
 
Edited to add:  And also, a magic item doesn't have to have the Focus Limitation!  If it doesn't, then it doesn't get taken away.  It could certainly be Restrainable, but without it being a Focus, it's basically another power that Bob has.  Its special effect is that it's a magic sword, but it's not a Focus Limitation when he can point his hand, confidently call out "Swordicus!  To me!" and it flies to him like Mjolnir to Thor.  
 
I hope this is helpful.  If not, ask more questions!   

No, that was the other guy who complained you should use Gm's common sense and not also make rules by Fiat. Which is silly. 
 
 
Agreed.
 
Yes, I would prefer that there were rules to cover it.  Which was why I went with the house rule I mentioned earlier.
 
However, the other guy refused to let it drop and kept exclaiming the the rules as written were 100% fine with no need to make a house rule. 
 
 
 
Which seems totally cool by me. I wanted to start this game in 4th edition, but Hero Designer is just too easy to use and without something comparable for 4th, I couldn't justify the time I'd spend statting out everything on paper. 

I very much like this bit...
 
 
...but to me the strict separation between "divine" clerical magic and "arcane" wizardly magic is a D&D-ism that I'm honestly tired of even in D&D.  To me, "shards from a weapon of a god that was destroyed in battle" puts me in mind of a crashed starship.  
 
I might have gods that are superpowerful beings, or Ancient Aliens, or something else, but if I'm going to lean into D&Disms I'm going to do it in D&D.

Okay, 
 
While it was fun for a few days, it's beginning to drive me nutty. That is to say, attempting to create an image whole cloth from nothing using only my phone's software (and accursed touch screen) for editing photos. Like, _lightly_ editing them.
 
To explain:  I can't just draw it because my scanner thinks the printer is busy.  The printer hasn't been busy in nearly a month, and this is the _last_ damned time I _ever_ buy an all-in-one: "You are unable to scan because your magenta is too stupidly expensive to buy right now."
 
Frikafrakafraggilfrak _that_ stupid crap!
 
And my computer has been dying a slow death and no longer recognizes photoshop, so the easy options are all taken out.
 
And while it _was_ fun, it's becoming an exercise in creative swearing, and I already have a day job for that, so .....
 
An unfinished map.  I mean, more unfinished than I intended.  
 
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1kicTqOKt9aj8He_Tejqc7uIiJu6Z5Ca5
 
Amusingly enough, I started with an extremely _large_ canvas.  I had managed to kind of trick the camera a bit, then the image software.  Well, let's be honest: the whole thing is the result of tricking the image software.  
 
unfortunately, it compressed into a seriously tiny image anyway.  
 
The image software-- being exclusively for photos-- had no way to add text, so if you will bear with a bit more tedium, I will pretend that someone is actually interested  and give you a rundown, the light version.
 
To start with, remember that in Campaign City, Tanghal Tower is still a thing / was still a thing (depends on the era) simply because I _really_ liked the name.   I never ran the adventure, but I _loved_ the name.  It was just "hunh?" enough to be believable.  Thus, I located this introduction to Champions / Campaign City in the remains of Tanghal Tower: all the action occurs in a city block referred to locally as Tanghal Square.  When I run this for my new players, what you're seeing is / was part of the ground floor of the tower.  When the tower was razed, the property owners opted to keep the ground and second floor (making demolition much more expensive) because of the ostentatious and deco design, figuring to convert the second floor to loft apartments and leaving the existing shops available.  The bank was the source of the Tanghal family's money, and there was a branch right here in the tower, where it remains to this day.
 
Because of the conditions in which I was working, this version of the map does not have the entire remaining block of the tower.  In fact, there is an alley directly behind this row of strip mall instead of a continuing ring of strip mall and large central courtyard, because damn, getting this far was sort of impressive to me.  In fact, there's not even much of the Square demonstrated. 
 
So quickly, from the top:
 
large four-lane road.  Not a highway, just a city street that is rather busy during rush hour, but not too terrible at other times of day.  There is a a strip of on-street parking and a generous sidewalk.
 
The empty section upper-left is a smallish but upscale restaurant that becomes important  from time to time in our games.  It was inadvertently named many years ago by another forum member, who in the course of an unrelated discussion mentioned Le Piege Evidente (forgive me; I can't remember where the accent marks and all that go).  I fell in love with that name, too, and it stuck.   Put the windows (yellow bars in the walls) anywhere you want, because I'm done with it.  In addition to the entrance doors (silver bars in the walls), the restaurant has an exit from the kitchen to the back alley for sanitation purposes.
 
Next to that is Gelato's Ice Cream, which was Tony's Gelato a couple of decades ago, then bought and re-styled in that retro-fifties kitsch by someone who completely misunderstood that Tony's name wasn't Gelato (though in recent years, gelato has re-appeared on the menu).  These days it's mostly a coffee and sandwich shop, though when the weather's nice, since the neighborhood isn't terrible and there's a large expanse of sidewalk (due to the removal of a large fountain that once filled the corner-- Tanghal Square was once known for its fountains) that is dotted with covered tables (yellow circles) and benches (under the red awnings), it's not uncommon to find people milling about enjoying a frozen treat or a good cup.    As with all the blank stuff, finish it out anyway you find appropriate.
 
Moving down, you find the bank (and more on-street parking).  A wide two-lane frontage road separates it from the large parking lot (that once serviced the old hotel when the Tower was still a Tower).  The first thing you notice when you walk in the bank is the marble tile floor, massive slabs  cut into six-sided geometric figures, two meters across (how fortuitous!) and grouted with a bold aquamarine color.....  The next thing you notice is that the ceilings are very high-- sixteen feet or so, with eight whisper-quite ceiling fans to ensure that everyone gets to ingest the tiniest bit of historic dust and to keep the air moving.  The obtrusiveness of the fans detract considerably from the beautiful moulded plaster ceiling.
 
Same pattern: left to right, top to bottom, inside the bank:
 
Upper left corner is a small private room with a table and three chairs set at it; three more are stacked in the corner.  This room is for those who wish a secure private area to work with their safety deposit boxes.  to the right are restrooms, one seat each, accessible behind the privacy / sound-deadening upholstered wall.  To the right again is a sub-lobby consisting of a couple of couches and a large mirror-and-chrome low table. Magazines (banking, investing, and fishing from your yacht) are stacked neatly on it.  The dotted line to the right (and counting down and to the right, save the large 20-ft opening, indicates a knee wall.  
 
For those who don't know,  a knee wall is any half-height or lower wall.  A few potted ficas trees (dark green) suggest privacy and serve to remind you that this is a bank.  On the topmost wall is a large horizontal filing cabinet, adorned with a potted fern (light green) so that you know this part is an office that receives people.  Center of this area are two desks, set front-to-front so that the employees at these desks sit more-or-less adjacent to each other buy face opposite directions.  There are two chairs in front of each desk.  in the lower right corner is another filing cabinet.  The knee wall at the bottom of the area is mostly open, having only enough wall to provide attractive stanchions.
 
 The next office is the assistant manager's office; the branch manager's office is the larger one with the two windows.  While the fixtures of the office show they've been in use for at least twenty years, they are clearly much newer than the rest of the building, and no attempt has been made to match the style of the rest of the stately and beautiful interior.  As before, this was tedious as hell with the equipment I had at hand, so decorate them any way you would like.  As business at this location is not what it once was, the branch manager actually manages two locations; the manager and assistant manager are rarely both present.  As the current remodel made no allowances for it, breaks are usually taken in whichever office is empty.  There is a guard stationed outside and more-or-less between these offices.  By order of the current Mrs. Tanghal, the guards are charged with greeting patrons as they enter and wishing them well as they exit.  The guards don't mind terribly, if only because it helps pass the time.
 
Back to the left side:
Below the private room are two private "cabinets", each with two chair and a mounted bench, again for those wishing to work with their safety deposit boxes.  To the right of that is a very, very, _very_ large lobby, mostly to give new players some room to move around in and to give some practice with range modifiers and panicked civilians running around.  More on the lobby later.  For the record, the largeness in here was created by the removal of yet another massive bronze fountain that was once the jewel of this, the flagship branch for Tanghal B&T.
 
Below the alcoves is a cleverly-concealed (not hidden; just dressed up to look like a very old mahogany door) vault door that opens to the safety deposit room.  Both walls are lined with safety deposit boxes (undrawn for reasons you already know.  Feel free to do what you want.  Put a toilet in here, for all it's going to matter).  The small alcove between the security deposit room and the private chambers is accessed through a security door (again, nicely appointed) that opens from the inside, but must be opened with a key from the outside.  Directly outside that is a service counter with stools for two employees, one of whom will accompany a security deposit box holder into the alcove and open the vault or the private rooms (if one is available).
 
Across from this counter is the collection of movable brass poles about 30" high (brass-ish circles) from which only the finest and most luxurious of red velvet faux ropes will be clipped to create guidelines for cueing up to the various teller stations and suggest a direction of travel toward the exit for those leaving the tellers.  in a space on the floor created almost by accident of necessity stand two dozen more brass poles and worn, slightly faded velvet ropes, used on heavy traffic days to create a cattle walk leading up to the teller chutes.  It seems nothing makes bankers more nervous than large crowds moving aimlessly about.   Except maybe ski masks.
 
Back on the left, this time at the bottom.
 
The mother lode --, err.. vault.  While the employees unanimously agree the the direction of the door swing makes opening it in the morning and closing it at night unnecessarily complicated, they understand the discretion of blocking line-of-site from anywhere on the floor to the interior of the vault (can't be too careful with Mind Control and Teleport in play; that's what the security pros say).  Because of the rise of super-crime, this vault features a mechanism that any alarm-- silent or audible, or even fire-- has been raised,  will close and secure within within ten seconds.  The door is far too heavy to move much faster than that.  unfortunately, the motors groan under the strain, and anyone making a PER roll (hearing) at -2 (if there is a noisy panic; otherwise no penalty) will hear...  "something...."
 
The massive counter in the corner is the original teller's counter from the twenties, real mahogany, and a victim of the last few remodels.  Cut down to its present size and moved to several locations over the years, it was _clearly_ not meant to sit where it now sits.  However, the craftsmanship of the last remodel team was above average, and while it looks clearly out of place, one has to look closely to see where the mistakes or joinery problems are.  Besides, most are simply admiring the craftsmanship of those who originally built it, for it is an ornate piece of history.  There are only four teller locations now (identified by the narrowing of the counter), each with an oversized cabinet (the "squarey" sections between the windows) that reach upward to a height of seven feet and provide privacy for patrons to conduct their business.  In keeping with the original style and in an attempt to maintain as much of the feel of the original decor, there is no glass barrier between teller and patron.  However, the counters are quite deep and are higher than usual (about four-and-a-half-feet high) making leaping over them difficult.  The last remodel saw steel plating installed behind them (hidden on the teller's side), giving the tellers a somewhat more secure area to hide should something go wrong.
 
While the door granting passage between the lobby and the tellers' area can be freely opened from inside, like the door to the security deposit area, it is a heavy-duty security door and must be unlocked to open from the lobby side.  on the lower wall is a desk used by the head cashier (made from some of the mahogany salvaged from the last remodel of the teller counter) and a maroon leather vintage desk chair behind it.
 
The bottom right corner:
 
Note the lovely dark green of the ficas....es?  on either side of that brown thing, then two smaller ficases on the step.  There is no doubt that you're in a bank.
 
The two-step platform is all that remains of the original manager's / owner's office.  At some point in the seventies, after the death of the old man Tanghal, the wood-and-glass brick walls were taken down...  and nothing was ever put back in their place.  The eye-catching raised platform created originally to give the manager a better view into the lobby and of the tellers' counter (in the original floor plan) was left as it was attractive. Unfortunately, the practice of placing potted plants here and there has resulted in stains, discoloration, and a bit of wood warpage here and there, but your players are probably not going to notice that for a while.  Or ever, unless one of them continues banking here (living in one of the upstairs lofts makes banking here quite convenient).  Eventually a more practical office was created, and this space used for various purposes.  Today, there are two small desks, topped with simulated marble that doesn't quite match the floors but does manage to be completely out of place on the wooden platform.  Two customer chairs are placed across from each desk, and again the magnificent ficas is used to create the illusion of privacy.  Along each of the two walls are long wooden counters, underneath which are various books and a few filing drawers.  In the corner these counters flow seamlessly into a massive book shelf that rises up ten feet above the floor upon which it sits.  Note the light green ferns, which are here to bring you comfort and remind you that your own houseplants may be a bit dusty, too.....  In front of the book case is another chrome-and-glass low table (smaller than the other in the opposite corner), a burgundy couch, and two burgundy chairs.
 
Suffice it to say that the entire place-- with its authentic period by mis-matched furnishings, clearly "recycled" original components and modern-but-no-longer-modern structures added with each remodel, lights and outlets cut into or through plaster features in places they were clearly never intended to be, the entire bank oozes not the encapsulated original glory of the building that the remodelers were hoping for, but rather drives home a subtle "fall from grace" feel.  It's not unpleasant or tragic, but it is just a bit melencholy.
 
Leaving the bank:
 
In Campaign City, there's a second-run movie theater here, but you do whatever you want.  Below that there is a long, wide hallway leading to the bank of four elevators that lead to the upstairs apartments.  Below that is a mini-storage (used mostly by residents of the apartments).
 
But again:  it was such a massive pain in the rear, that this is as far as this particular map is ever going to get.  And honestly, it's all you need.  Just wing the rest of it.
 
Funny trivia:
 
The original design of this map (which I have hit pretty close) was laid out to slot into any corner of the classic "Rose's" map from the early editions, and add a bit to it to boot!
 
 
Good night, all.
 
 
Duke
 
 
 

Ya' think?  LOL 😆

You are not wrong.
 
However, there have been three rules editions (2.5 editions?) since then.  Starting with 5, the base character no longer had to be the most powerful character.  The accepted reasoning for this (we will never know the _actual_ reason, as the other does not discuss this, ever) is how annoying it was for all of us making multiform characters to have to _pay_ points to _lose_ powers and abilities.  I don't know how "brand new" you actually are, so don't take this as sarcasm or anything along those lines:
 
I have a small reputation here for _hating_ change (I haven't left second edition yet, and your antique BBB was the fourth edition) _and_ for putting story and concept ahead of of anything it says in the "must build" or "Must buy" or "points go here" parts of the rules, and even _I_ thought that idea was BS:  the base character should pay costs because he is the essence of who the character is: what do you do when you're not super-heroing?  Well, I use my tremendously expensive civilian ID to relax, then change back into my "normal self" to go fight crime."
 
It doesn't sit right.
 
 
_However_, in the interest of complete fairness, it should be noted that the newer "the most expensive guy does not have to pick up the tab" editions have even more "Dear GM" letters about keeping a sharp eye on this, and how easily it can be abused, and don't be afraid to say "get that crap out of here!" to a character built to maximize the raping of the multiform rules.
 
 
As a general side note:  I see a _lot_ of multiform being combined with "only in hero / alternate ID"  being laid in front of me, which will get a thumbs-down every time.  Pick one.  You can't have both.
 
The Hell of it is you can simulate a lot of what multiform does with a power pool and regenerated lists that draw from that pool.  Why, at the end of the day, and appropriate power pool and regenerated powers from it are really the only thing you need: look at the number of fan-made characters on the web that do just that:  "Here are his defining traits, and we're going to lump everything else into a power pool because we can't afford to build him straight out."
 
But that's radically off-topic, isn't it?  
 

The wizard can also load up on mundane weapons and armor for no point cost, only coin.  
 
I usually consider mundane weapons to be well enough limited by Normal Characteristic Maxima, STR minimums, and the like, that anything anyone pays points for should have the opportunity to go a little bit higher.  
 
sentry0, to answer your original post, I would go ahead and charge full cost for them, possibly with the idea that they may modify their build into a Multipower or VPP eventually.  

I very much like this bit...
 
 
...but to me the strict separation between "divine" clerical magic and "arcane" wizardly magic is a D&D-ism that I'm honestly tired of even in D&D.  To me, "shards from a weapon of a god that was destroyed in battle" puts me in mind of a crashed starship.  
 
I might have gods that are superpowerful beings, or Ancient Aliens, or something else, but if I'm going to lean into D&Disms I'm going to do it in D&D.

The gods in my campaign are the remnants of the AIs that ran the ships and terraforming devices used in the initial waves of colonization, and later, the various utilities that allowed the ancient cities to function (think of magic as a form of broadcast power). Most have faded away over the eons, but a few remain, if you know where to look.
 
The hidden background of the setting assumed that the various fantasy races are actually genetically-modified humans. Dwarves were meant to be heavy-worlder miners, elves were originally modified for a lower gravity, and so on.

I thought our problem in HERO was that we were aging middle-aged and (mostly) men.  Not the target demographic. 
 
As an interested third party, I think none of the earlier posts warranted downvoting, though they may have warranted noticing in the discussion.
 
I know I sometimes feel hurt by comments on the forums but I think downvoting only exacerbates disagreements and encourages bad behaviour.
 
I know I ALWAYS think I am in the right, I expect many opinion givers on the internet feel likewise.  I am asking one of you (if not both) and everyone else to go back and remove all the downvotes. 
 
Then see if we can discuss like true old gamers who like the same game....
 
Doc

That of course isn't, but the discussion wasn't about group table rules. It was always about the GM exercising 'common sense' and making a ruling or restiction, which would by definition be ruling from GM fiat. I understand why the other guy can't admit that because it would mean admitting his arguement was inconsistant. Why do you care about the terminology? How is a GM passing a judgement call/house rule, for whatever reason, not GM fiat? And I get the vibe that if it were, that would somehow be bad? Am I picking you up right? Why would that be the case?
 
 
No, and you've been nothing but polite and helpful. I have no issue with you (or anyone else on the board).
 
What I want is to be able to discuss issues with the system without someone edition warring or making snide insults against me or my group. I don't care if someone disagrees with me,  I just don't like insults and edition wars.
 
 
 
My players just came from playing a very tacticle game where positioning was ultra important, so yeah, they are doing everything they can to get into a better attack position. Despite insults to the contrary, there is nothing inherently munchkin about using the rules as they are written. Most games with map based combat avoid this sort of thing with either an engagement rule, abstracting combat so position doesn't matter,  or, more recently, attacks of opportunity (or the equivalent). But when they aren't there, and facing is an issue, and position matters... it's natural to attempt to maximize bonuses.  I think Hero just needs to pick one or two of those options (or be house ruled as I have done) to fix the inconsistancy. 
 
But yes, it's silly and I've fixed it with aborting to attack someone if they try something like that (this also allows some tacticle exploitation, because if your armored mate runs past and eats their attack, your lightly armored figure can go after without fear because they have already aborted).