Chris Goodwin

Fantasy Hero Complete in fact includes, electronically at least, 18 sample PCs (in PDF, RTF, and HDC formats!), a starter adventure (the Val of Stalla), 24 monsters, the Kingdom of Grishun setting, and five maps (kingdom, city, town, countryside, and dungeon).  So we pretty much have the Fantasy Hero starter set!  The only thing it doesn't include is the dice.  $20 for book + PDF, $10 for PDF only; both of those include the adventure, setting, PCs, monsters, etc.
 
We pretty much have the Fantasy Hero starter set! 

Those 18 pregens alone are worth the 10 bucks.  The rest is also great, it’s something not to miss.

Fantasy Hero Complete in fact includes, electronically at least, 18 sample PCs (in PDF, RTF, and HDC formats!), a starter adventure (the Val of Stalla), 24 monsters, the Kingdom of Grishun setting, and five maps (kingdom, city, town, countryside, and dungeon).  So we pretty much have the Fantasy Hero starter set!  The only thing it doesn't include is the dice.  $20 for book + PDF, $10 for PDF only; both of those include the adventure, setting, PCs, monsters, etc.
 
We pretty much have the Fantasy Hero starter set! 

Fantasy Hero Complete in fact includes, electronically at least, 18 sample PCs (in PDF, RTF, and HDC formats!), a starter adventure (the Val of Stalla), 24 monsters, the Kingdom of Grishun setting, and five maps (kingdom, city, town, countryside, and dungeon).  So we pretty much have the Fantasy Hero starter set!  The only thing it doesn't include is the dice.  $20 for book + PDF, $10 for PDF only; both of those include the adventure, setting, PCs, monsters, etc.
 
We pretty much have the Fantasy Hero starter set! 

My thoughts on Duke Bushido's concerns (most of this is extremely basic and everyone already knows it, I'm just outlining my philosophy on it):
 
Playing an RPG is a cooperative task.  We get together and agree to what we want to play (Hero System), where we want to play (at Bob's house), when we want to play (Saturday afternoons), and who we want to play with (Bob, Joe, Steve, and Mike, but not Dave -- he's not invited anymore after the incident with the tuna fish).  The Hero System takes the position that the players should have more control over what kind of character they play.  Ever played D&D and you really wanted to be a Paladin/Ranger/whatever, but you rolled crappy stats and were stuck as a cleric or something?  Ever thought it would be neat to play something unique, like a farm boy who found a magic hat that gave him unusual abilities to compete with the big sword/big fireball crowd?  Well the Hero System allows you to do that.
 
In the Hero System, you can take powers and abilities through something called a "focus".  A focus is an object that is required to use the power.  This gives you a discount because the object can then be taken away from you.  If they take away your suit of armor/magic hat/special shield/freeze ray, then you can't use the associated powers.  But one of the inherent assumptions of this particular game is that you have a degree of control over your character concept.  If you want to be the farm boy with the magic hat, then you get to be the farm boy with the magic hat (subject to the agreement of the rest of the people in your group, of course -- I'm sorry Wayne, you can't play Captain Bitch-Rape in a game based on Saturday morning cartoon characters).  That means that even though a focus can be taken away, you can be secure in the knowledge that you're going to get it back at some point soon.  Yes, the orcs can capture you and take away your magic hat.  But normally they aren't going to send it away to the evil wizard on another continent, not before you manage to escape the dungeon and find the hat carelessly left sitting in a storage room.  The magic hat, you see, is an integral part of your character concept.  The discount you received for taking a focus is based on the problems you incur for losing it temporarily, not permanently.
 
Now, as I said, games are a cooperative effort.  You have some degree of control over your character, but not total.  In some circumstances, the GM may decide that the story demands you spend a period of time without that hat.  You've got to go on a quest to reclaim it or something.  And it's entirely possible that halfway through that quest, you say "screw the hat, I want to do something else".  And that's fine too.  But generally you'll get your focus back, because this is a cooperative game we're playing, and it's not real life.  The genre you're playing should have more influence on what happens than what would "realistically" take place.  In real life if you lose your special hat, there's very little guarantee you'll ever get that exact hat back.  But in a cartoon, the animators always draw you with that same hat, so you're probably gonna get it returned pretty soon.
 
When Rocket Pack Man gives the alien rocket pack that he found on the street to Gary Groundpounder, and Gary flies off, that focus may be gone until the GM and the player have a conversation.  Things like "why did you do that?  Do you want to change your character?  You know he wasn't planning on coming back, right?"  And the player is like "I dunno, I didn't think about it."  One of the guidelines for playing in a cooperative game is not to try to ruin the fun -- don't do things that put the other people at the table in a difficult situation (as opposed to putting the characters in a difficult situation, which is fine).  If you wanted to keep your irreplaceable rocket pack, why did you give it to the alien who was going back to his home planet?  Now the GM has to come up with some kind of in-game excuse for how you get it back.  Or he can let you change your character.
 
--
 
The most important thing to realize is that the game rules exist to give us options for playing.  "Focus" is a limitation that generally reflects people being temporarily deprived of an ability.  The easier it is to deprive them of it, the more points it is worth.  But that doesn't mean that everyone with a sword has a focus.  Let's look at some examples.
 
He-Man has a sword.  He-Man is almost never deprived of his sword.  He almost never gets disarmed, though it may happen very occasionally.  Of course, He-Man almost never hits anyone with the sword anyway.  The sword is really He-Man's method of transformation.  He-Man's player and the GM talk about this before the game begins, and they decide that Only In Hero ID is the appropriate limitation here.  The sword is basically an infinitely durable thingy that he holds in his hand and uses to change form, but it doesn't actually do any real damage (because it's a Filmation cartoon and he isn't allowed to stab people).  The sword isn't a focus, it has no powers.  He just has a big boost to his stats with -1/4 "Only in Hero ID" written beside it.  And the way to change is to hold up the sword that nobody ever pays attention to you carrying around.  It's occasionally possible to get stuck as Prince Adam, but it'll be rare.
 
Joe the Fighter is just a standard heroic fantasy character.  He has a variety of swords, some better than others.  They aren't really a focus, they're just a weapon he found.  He didn't pay points for them, he can't sell them for points.  It doesn't matter if Joe is carrying a +2 longsword or a two-handed sword, no particular sword is a core part of his concept.  He is a more normal RPG character, where his equipment is gained or lost entirely through the events of the game.  None of his equipment has "plot protection" where you know that's his special weapon and he should always have a version of it (I'm looking at you, Simon Belmont from Castlevania with that whip you always have).  Nope, Joe the Fighter just uses what's available, and even if he likes a certain weapon, it isn't special enough to him to become a part of his character concept.  If it were, he'd have spent points on it.
 
Darth Vader has a red lightsaber.  Vader is so good with his lightsaber that nobody can ever disarm him (unless, you know, you actually cut his arm off).  Vader may not have actually put the focus limitation on his sword power.  He may not have any limitation on it.  While it looks like a lightsaber and he wears it on his belt, he never loses it once in the entire trilogy.  He just always has his sword when he needs it.  "But couldn't he be captured and the lightsaber taken away?"  Mmmmmaybe.  But he probably cleared that with the GM first.  "Don't worry, you aren't gonna be captured.  This isn't that kind of story."  Vader doesn't get the focus limitation, but also no matter how many times you try to disarm him, it won't work.  He can just use the Force and now it's back in his hand, no questions asked.  Vader comes up with a semi-plausible reason for why people can't take it away from him and therefore they don't.  Remember, there's cooperation in this between the player and the GM.
 
 

I don't like them because to me it seems to turn characters into superheroes with swords.  That's not the power level I like running or playing at. 
 
If you're fighting opponents that are slightly too hard for you to affect, the answer isn't supposed to be Moar DC!!!  Figure something else out.  Research its weaknesses.  Use the environment.  Lead it into a pit or off a cliff.  Tie it up with ropes.  Or run away and live to fight another day!  Come back with a dozen mercenaries.  It's not like you get XP per kill... And if you have ordinary  Combat Skill Levels, you can put two of them into +1 DC anyway.  
 
I don't believe that Combat Luck is overpowered, because even three levels is more or less within the range of heavy armor or a wizard's defensive spell, but it just doesn't seem to fit into the power level I like to play or run at.  
 
I also feel similarly about Penalty Skill Levels or any Skill Levels bought with "only for (X)" Limitations.  If your special effect is "I'm so good with a sword that I can do more damage with it," buy more CSLs.  You can also use those CSLs to make it easier to perform a called shot, either to a Hit Location with higher damage multiples or one that has less armor.  
 
Edit to add:  Take a look at my Low Heroic Protocols document, which might give you some ideas.

Fantasy Hero Complete in fact includes, electronically at least, 18 sample PCs (in PDF, RTF, and HDC formats!), a starter adventure (the Val of Stalla), 24 monsters, the Kingdom of Grishun setting, and five maps (kingdom, city, town, countryside, and dungeon).  So we pretty much have the Fantasy Hero starter set!  The only thing it doesn't include is the dice.  $20 for book + PDF, $10 for PDF only; both of those include the adventure, setting, PCs, monsters, etc.
 
We pretty much have the Fantasy Hero starter set! 

Fantasy Hero Complete in fact includes, electronically at least, 18 sample PCs (in PDF, RTF, and HDC formats!), a starter adventure (the Val of Stalla), 24 monsters, the Kingdom of Grishun setting, and five maps (kingdom, city, town, countryside, and dungeon).  So we pretty much have the Fantasy Hero starter set!  The only thing it doesn't include is the dice.  $20 for book + PDF, $10 for PDF only; both of those include the adventure, setting, PCs, monsters, etc.
 
We pretty much have the Fantasy Hero starter set! 

Because I decided to spend fifteen points on a rocket belt.  That's all the justification I need: my character's flight is acceptable to the GM, and I decided that he flies via a belt with those neat-o little retro rockets on it: the kind with the wooba-wooba-wooba-woooba disks on one end.
 
 
 
He doesn't have to maintain it, because by all the popular wisdom, he paid points for it, so he can't be deprived of it for any meaningful period of time.  Sometimes, when he gets bored, he sets it on fire just to watch it reassemble itself.  Other times, he throws it under monster trucks then runs home to see if he can get there before his new belt spontaneously generates.  
 
 
I just double-checked, then decided on a copy paste, to make sure I'm exactly quoting myself:
 
" If I give Groundstuck Man my flying belt,"
 
What part of that sounds like I can make another?  Or that I could make the first one?   Perhaps I am the Second Greatest American Hero, and some alien flew by and tossed it out a window, then flew off into the cosmos never to be seen again.  The only thing that seems to matter to anyone is "he paid points for it so he can't be denied use of it for more than a suitable flavor-length of time.  You know: let's turn Focus into some kind of standard-effects rule Activation or Jam where 8- translates to a full turn; 11- translates to an hour, and 14- translates to a day and call it good.  Okay, that last was hyperbolic, but is not the whole point of Focus being a disadvantage the fact that it can be lost, broken, stolen-- taken away from you?  Totally out of your control, being used (or collecting dust wherever you dropped it) by someone else, with you having no actual control over when or even if it will show back up?  Didn't we go even further with focus, adding things like "fragile" and "unique"---
 
which just burns me up.  If we're going to up the bonus because it's easy to break, or up the bonus because there's no way in Hell I can ever get another one---  but then make absolutely certain that these things are nowhere near as limiting as the name implies--- then we're lying to ourselves or we're doing it wrong.  If we're not willing to risk breaking our irreplaceable focus, then ditch unique.   Same with fragile.  Same with Focus, really, because the only difference we're willing to accept between Focus and UBO or UOO or EIEIO that we are willing to accept is that "It can be stolen," but even then, it can't stay stolen.
 
And we keep going-- and odd, only when Focus is up for discussion-- to "the source material is superhero comics."  Now I _admit_, routinely, that I know bug-squat about superhero comics.  I accept that this is a trope, but maintain that it's a damned stupid one.  When we get to Heroic "Oh, well, Hell-- no big deal there.  He only paid money (game money; fake money) for that.  Let it fall into the toilet and get flushed out to sea, through a dimensional vortex and a thousand years forward in time.  No biggie."
 
Points make the difference is a crock of crap unless Focus is re-tooled to work on a double-standard.  Something like "Focus?  No; not for supers.  Your gun a special effect; your belt is a special effect, whatever.  Sure, make it restrainable, put some standard effects on Activation to build a time block for which you can be deprived of it-- even put a unique Limited Power:  Roll X- to see if you remembered to bring it with you / if it's been stolen for X Phases; whatever, but you can't use Focus with points.  That's off limits."
 
Hell, I might actually have to house rule that, now that it popped out.
 
But no; I won't have to house rule that, because we've had enough years together that we're all on pretty much the same page with regards to points being lost.  Still, it might be nice to have something ready to test if I ever find the time for a new group.
 
Anyway, we keep using Supers as the key reason Foci can't be gone forever and very rarely during this conversation do we acknowledge "but there's the pretense that supers is only one of ten different genres this system -- this totally universal system-- works with.  Of course, it's so universal that we have to make this one special case....  Which works as well as the rather grating "the exception that proves the rule!"   ugh.  >:/
 
 
 
 
I didn't either.  It was intergalactic space garbage tossed out by a pandimensional litterbug, and I happened to be Johnny on the Spot when it happened.  But I don't have to maintain it. I can bury it at the beach, wait for the tide to cycle, go back and dig it up and it works _fine_-- you know: because I paid points for it, so I can't be deprived of it longer than it took me to bury, wait, and dig it back up-- or maybe that was too long, so it dug itself back up and flew across town to land on my waist.  And of course, I don't have Activation, Burnout, Jam, or any other mechanical issues that imply the need for maintenance, so...
 
 
 
Which doesn't happen to me, ever, if I don't give it away because why?
 
Because _points!_, that's why.   I maintain the points are still paid: they are paid by a guy who doesn't actually _own_ the belt anymore, but they are paid.  Now as I have also noted, here and elsewhere-- though I'm not sure why, as it gets completely glossed over / ignored every damned time in the big hurry to come up with all the reasons why I _can't_ give away (or steal) a Focus forever:  The points are paid.  If Groundstuck Man likes the belt so much he wants to keep it, and I'm cool with letting him keep it (since I have just discovered my crippling fear flying outside of every airplane in existence or whatever), why not?  Why can't we work out a deal?  You take an EP from every session and apply it toward the belt.  Then I'll get one rebated back  (or, more famously:  you send your EP to Foxbat and he'll use them to pay off the belt).
 
Don't bother with "but this opens doors to everyone chipping in to buy one guy a massive power--" 
 
or a vehicle. 
 
Or a base.
 
Because it _doesn't_.  Am I an expert on the entire human race?  No.  Have I been working with the idea that points can be lost / items can be traded since about '82 or so?  Yes; that one I can answer positively.   I can also say that to date, _no one_ has ever said "Damn, guys; Tim's character sucks!  Everyone chip in ten EP to Tim so that he can add twenty dice to that attack, double his forcefield, and buy some _real_ movement...."
 
Never.
 
Not once.
 
_Can_ this kind of thinking lead to that?
 
Also no.   Well, yes; assuming the group is allowed entirely to their own devices, which brings me back to my single biggest sticking point with what remains of HERO fandom:
 
That's what the GM is for!  It's his job to make sure things are fair(ish), fun (hella), and don't go all kinds of five-dimensional pear-shaped.  I _totally understand_ that the bulk of the remaining HERO fans see the entire system as some kind of self-regulating computer program and that the ultimate goal of this system is to find some sort of mathematical perfection that will one day be able to math the GM out of existence, and Hell- one day, that may actually be possible  (for the record, that day was like ten or fifteen years ago, and it was called Champions Online, then City of something or other, which eventually died for a while then _kind of_ came back?  Meanwhile, the GM-regulated pen-and-paper kind of Champions kept being played, here and there).
 
But even then, we can't reconcile "points have to be paid!" with "Points were paid!" because they were paid by the guy I took it from.  The math works:  15 pts of Rocket Belt = 15 pts of Rocket Belt.
 
 
That may be the problem there: this pervasive concept that there is a "right" way to play Supers, or a "right" universe to be in.  Now to be fair, I _don't_ know much about comic books, save the few (way outdated by now, I'm sure) ones I've read, what a few of my players talk about during breaks (not a lot of my players read comics, either, but we _do_ talk to one another   ), so -- while I hate to use this example, it's one I feel comfortable using:
 
There are more than (were more?) two comic book companies, but let's look at one particular one:
 
Marvel.  In marvel, mutants are horrible, hated, persecuted people that even parts of the government are out to get.  
 
Now let's look at Superman's universe:  He's a mutant.  Oh, cool!  What powers does he have?  I wish _I_ could have mutant powers.  That would be awesome.....
 
In fact, _only_ Marvel does that, and super-wierdly, it doesn't really seem that all of marvel does it.  It doesn't even seem like a _majority_ of Marvel does it.
 
These are pretty opposite mindsets / campaign settings.
 
Which is the "right" one?  Which is "the comics-correct way to play?"
 
"I want to give Bob my ruby-red ring of righteousness!"
 
Why?
 
"Because I've decided I'm going to build myself some power armor with these Eps I've been hoarding, and the ring doesn't fit over the metal glove.  Besides, he's the Scarlet Serpent; it'll work well with his costume and his theme, I think."
 
"okay, cool.  You understand that it won't work if take the points out of it?"
 
"Yeah; I know.  We talked about it, and we've got a deal worked out: I'm going to keep it powered (paid for) until he saves up enough to cover it."
 
or
 
"NO, DAMN IT!  What kind of fast crap are you going to pull here?  You made it!  It's yours!  You have total control over it!  You CANNOT give that way!"
 
Comics or not, that doesn't even make sense.  I mean, you can actually _smell_ the clover the bull was eating before he dropped that one.....
 
But opinions on sensible or practical universes, I find it hard to say "must be like "the comics universe (which have already seen is inconsistent _at best_), because there is just no room to do any other thing in a universal system.  In fact, trying to anything else is wrong, because this system is so damned _universal_."  Hunh.  There's that clover again......
 
 
 
 
Right.  No; let me rephrase that, as, if I were to level with you, I don't personally believe that there _is_ a "right way to use the rules" or a completely "wrong way to use the rules."  Further, I think trying to find and / or enforce one is not just pointless, but counter to everyone actually _enjoying_ the rules.  So to rephrase:
 
That's pretty much how I see it.  And no; I don't surprise anyone with it, either.  When new players go through Character Generation, everything that the express curiosity about or interest in is painstakingly explained to them.  This happens over and over, every character, until they get it all by themselves.  No one who has ever taken a Focus has been surprised to have it unavailable now and again; no one (like two?  Three people since the first FH introduced Independent?  Long damned time) who has ever permanently lost a Focus has been surprised by that, either.  Everyone on the same page, well ahead of the event (in this particular case, nearly ten years ahead of it) seems absolutely fair to me and mine.
 
You keep telling your kids "be careful, or this will happen."  You tell them; you discipline them; they keep doing it.  Is it horribly, horribly wrong-- is it some personal failing in you-- when what you've warned them about finally does happen?
 
 
 
What's the difference between "paid for" and "currently financing?"
 
What happens to all my crap when I die, other than my poor wife will have to dump the whole lot onto eBay, because by then there will be like maybe eight HERO players in the whole universe....
 
My daughter will likely get my motorcycles; my son will likely get my truck.  My daughter will then likely sell one of the motorcycles to put a new engine in the truck, if my son opts to keep it.  But still --someone will have to take possession of it, even if only long enough to dispose of it because shit doesn't just magically disappear when the last owner dies.  Unless it's still being financed, of course.  Then it's a self-solving problem in sixty to ninety days, though the dead guy's credit will just be all kinds of ruined.   It occurs to me that the previous owner of my wood chipper and my rototiller is dead, and has been for a number of years.  I've still got them.
 
Paid for.  Unless we're instituting XP taxes of some sort, paid for stuff is here to stay.
 
And just to head off the "but you used money" angle (as if that makes _any_ difference, because paid for is paid for):
 
I earned that money with XP.  I beat my head against many, many barriers throughout my life, working through, over, or around them.  I took the XP I gained to increase my knowledge skills and my professional skills to the point that my skills allowed me to make enough money to by lots of exotic crap, like my Collectable Text Book Game (not my gag, but I love it!  I would credit it, but for the life of me, I can't remember who it was.  Anyway, thank you, fellow forumite!)  So I bought it with money; I bought it with XP.  Either way, when I die, it won't vanish on its own.
 
 
Why is it that when "Focus points have to be paid / refunded / balanced we talk about supers, but when points are "the problem," we talk about anything else?  I don't really want to get into it, but I suspect it's because none of us want to actually see the glaring double-standard.
 
At any rate:
 
What issue?
 
I have no issue here.  Steve was given some stuff; Steve lost some stuff.  Steve was given some more stuff.  He still has it.  For now, at least.
 
Now had a deal been brokered-- something like "this is a hundred gold, Steve!"  well, no one has a problem with that.
 
"This is a powerful whatever-the-hell-it-was, Steve, and I will not take less than a hundred gold for it!  And I will not craft this for anyone who is not worthy of having it!"  well, no one has a problem with that, either.  Now if "proving your worth" is in any way trading XP-- Give up 10 now, and then your next five, then half of what you earn until you pay off the last ten"-- then everyone loses their frakin' minds, _even though_ "points be balanced" and "points be paid."  
 
Double-standard.
 
Even though it _removes_ that link to the other guy's character sheet, it's _wrong_.  Points be paid; points be balanced.  But ooh-- evil bad juju.
 
Is it spring?  So much clover......
 
 
 
All of these are that most horrible of things:
 
GM territory.    Forgive the short, undetailed example, but I've been on the board like an hour more than I wanted to be, so I'm going to wrap up.  I had wanted to respond to Chris and a couple others as well tonight, but I'm just out of time.
 
 
 
Don't leave out the Cult of Steve.  That was hilarious.  
 
 
 
Yes and no  (I know; I know-- the worst of all possible examples).  It _controls_ the creation of magic items, yes.  But then, I prefer low fantasy to high  (fewer people tying to talk me into making it Tolkien), so such control is fine with me.  And of course, I don't need to re-hash moving it from one sheet to another, which means that creating an item weakens a character only briefly, and means he doesn't have to re-earn every EP he used (though, depending on the deal, he may have to wait for someone else to earn them.  I recommend a repossession clause).
 
 
 
As a thought experiment, I cede that there is at least one path by which that is possible.  As something that I've had in practice for a few decades, I can tell you that thus far, it hasn't.
 
 
 
Neither do I.  That's why I let things move from one sheet to another via EP expenditure.  I can't say it's perfect, but I can say it works remarkably well.
 
 
 
In this case, it does.  Significantly, it seems.
 
 
 
Now Hugh, I tell you this next bit for several reasons, the first of which is that typically, I _love_ discussing things with you, and I have a deep appreciation and respect for your willingness to carry on as long any conversational partner is willing (and civil) to do the same.  I've got a lot of love for you, Dude!  
 
But to potentially save you time, let me get this in up-front:  I won't discourage you from picking all this apart into whatever tiny little pieces you want, or using anything from it as good / bad examples for anyone else carrying on in this thread, but please don't do so expecting me to respond.  No; that's not me being ugly:  I've just shot my entire wad in this post; there is nothing sizable that I can add to this, I'm afraid, but if possible, I will be glad to clarify anything that isn't clear to you.  As far as a conversation, though-- I'm out of stuff.    I've got nothing new beyond what I put here (as far as I know).
 
I do intend to revisit later to at least answer Chris, if anything here didn't clarify things for him.
 
Oh-- I do have one thing to add, but it isn't much:
 
Most of this grew out of the very _need_ to answer the question you yourself posed:  your on a quest!  You're to retrieve the Five Colored Rings of the Holy Lantern Brigade!  The Lanterns died of ridicule directed at their emotion powers some thousand years ago, but your patron has a map!  It's a good one, too!
 
You find the rings, and low-and-behold, they work!
 
Why?
 
The people who used them died a thousand years ago.  The guy who made them died a thousand years before that.  Why do they still work?  Points be paid.  Stuff doesn't disappear if points be paid.  That's one of the tent stakes:  if they don't pay for it, it's a one-time trick, and that's okay.  If they want to do it a lot, forever going forward, they have to pay for it!
 
Also remember my non-supers stuff-- well, we were doing "non supers" before there were _rules_ for non-supers.  We had both Fantasy games and Sci-Fi games before there was even an Espionage  (remember any one of my comments that we needed car rules before there were car rules?).  So yes: it's heavily points-biased.  Even when we finally did get out hands on the "real" FH (the stand-alone first edition game), we couldn't shake completely that Champions bias.
 
 
Okay.
 
Now I'm done.
 
 
have a good evening, folks!  
 
 
 
Duke
 

To me, it was intended to simulate the Rogue's sneak attack.  Many gamers do want that in their game, so a means of simulating it is, in my view, appropriate to the game.  If every player takes an ability, then maybe we have a problem with either the players or the game.  Perhaps that crippled mentalist does not belong in this game if the only way he can survive is with a "lame justification" rather than a simulation of what happens in the source material.
 
However, as I recall the source material, that crippled mentalist does not die in Issue 2 because an attack solidly connects, killing him instantly.
 
 
This, to me, is the bigger issue.  Most games have DC and defense ranges, and DC and defense caps.  So no, you don't get to exceed the campaign DC cap because you took Deadly Blow (or Combat Luck, or Martial Arts, or high STR, or anything else).  Deadly Blow is simply limited CSLs, so if you're more skilled overall, rather than focusing your training exclusively on delivering more hurt, you take CSLs instead.
 
It always feels like the fight on this breaks down into "a dagger should only be able to do so much damage", "I want players to be able to use a wider variety of weapons and still be effective" and/or "the source material features skilled characters who inflict huge damage with light weapons - and I can imagine that, so Hero's tag line says I should be able to build it".
 
This, to me, is the most significant issue.  If the only characters (or even the only warriors) who can actually be effective are those who carry huge 2 handed weapons and wear heavy armor, then those are the only characters the players will want to play.  Players who want to play ineffectual characters only suitable for comedy relief are, in my experience, pretty rare. 
 
Just as being 3 DCs above the campaign norm is huge, being 3 DCs below campaign norm is "my character sucks - he cannot meaningfully contribute".
 
Armor + Combat Luck is pushing characters over campaign limits?  Then their total defenses need to be reined in.  Maybe that is achieved by adding a limitation to Combat Luck that "every 2 points of rDEF from another source reduces Combat Luck by 1 point".  But I will have a similar issue when Percy Platemail has a Shield of the Gods spell cast on him by Charlie Cleric, followed by a Skin of Stone spell cast by Marvin Mage.  Exceeding campaign limits is the problem, not the mechanics used to exceed those limits.
 
"Wow, every PC was Blessed by the Druids as a child and now has 6rPD/6rED.  What a coinkydink"

Oh, it's perfectly clear. 
 
I have a good bit to say, and between this thread, the points for magic items thread in Fantasy Hero, and the Western Hero equipment thread in main system discussion, not to mention a number of threads over the years I really want to compile up a post where I lay out my complete thinking on it. 
 
For my part, I've generally thought of Foci, magic item or not, superheroic or not, pretty similarly.  A lot of it goes back to first-gen, where in Champions, the reasons Batman doesn't pick up a tommy gun and become Captain Thompson, rapid fire blaster of bad guys, are two-fold: because that's not how it's done in the comics, and because he didn't pay points for the tommy gun.  
 
I'm on my phone right at the moment, and the seasonal change is hitting me maybe a bit harder than usual (and maybe some other things are too), but I'll owe you a post.  The general you, not just you, Duke.   By this weekend I should have something.

For the most part, in Hero, we don't really care whether our target dies, as much as we care whether our target is "out".  Whether that's dead, unconscious in GM-discretionland, unconscious by 1 and staying down, whatever.  For genres where the primary attack type is Killing, we can pretty much get all of that from Hit Locations plus sectional defenses.  It's not laid out for you right in front, and it's not a Champions-style or even D&D-style slugfest.  You have to take advantage of cover, you have to Brace & Set when you can, you have to use CSLs, and most importantly you have to have a team.  
 
I'm aware of how... vociferously... IRL gun enthusiasts discuss the... vast differences between, let's say, a 10mm round and a .40 S&W... and, I mean, is there really?  

For the most part, in Hero, we don't really care whether our target dies, as much as we care whether our target is "out".  Whether that's dead, unconscious in GM-discretionland, unconscious by 1 and staying down, whatever.  For genres where the primary attack type is Killing, we can pretty much get all of that from Hit Locations plus sectional defenses.  It's not laid out for you right in front, and it's not a Champions-style or even D&D-style slugfest.  You have to take advantage of cover, you have to Brace & Set when you can, you have to use CSLs, and most importantly you have to have a team.  
 
I'm aware of how... vociferously... IRL gun enthusiasts discuss the... vast differences between, let's say, a 10mm round and a .40 S&W... and, I mean, is there really?  

Common sense, dramatic sense, special effects...
 
Why do you have a Flying Belt?  Did you just find it in a dumpster one afternoon?  Is it a high-tech item that your character built and maintains?  Sounds like you can make another.  Meanwhile, Groundstuck Man does not know how to maintain it, so it eventually wears out and he can't fly any more.
 
That's just one example, of course.  Plenty of others could be considered.  Cap's shield is a great example of a focus for which there is no logical in-universe reason WHY he always gets it back - he just always gets it back, because it is his focus.
 
 
That depends  on how the GM runs Independent.  If the items last just long enough for you to earn the xp to make another one, then your character really doesn't earn xp any more - he just keeps replacing the points he loses every few sessions.  If it does not get taken away - permanently - at some point, then the limitation is not really limiting.  You already got the point savings for the Focus, which is limiting because the power might be taken away temporarily.
 
What happens to those Independent items when a character is killed?  Marty Mage made a Magic Sword for Slashing Steve.  He spent 25 points on that Independent item.  Marty gets eaten by a Dragon.  Steve still has his sword.  Marty's player brings in Wally Wizard, who spends 25 points on an Independent Magic Shield for Slashing Steve.  Then Wally gets killed, and Steve's sword and shield get melted, by  huge Fire Elemental.
 
So Marty's player brings in Arnie Artificer, who spends 30 points on a new sword for Steve, 30 points for a new Shield, 30 points for a Magic Bow for Steve, 30 points for Steve's new Magic Armor and another 30 for a Magic Belt.  Arnie doesn't live long afterwards.  His "devoted to the success of Steve the Chosen One" has been satisfied, so his "places no value on his own life" causes him to enter combat despite having no actual abilities of his own, so he quickly dies.  Luckily the Cult of Steve has lots of artificers from which he can draw his next character, who will arrive with more tribute for Steve.
 
Sure, a ridiculous example that takes the Independent limitation to its extreme, but it does highlight the issue.  Of course, maybe the GM simply makes an extra effort to remove these Independent items once their creator disappears from the game - but isn't that linking the points back to the  character who paid them, when Independent was specifically there to remove that link?
 
The "PowerPlayer" builds a character with 75% of his character points invested in Independent items.  He has way more power, at the outset, then the other PCs, who did not make Independent items.  Eventually, his items disappear forever.  Now he is vastly underpowered.  No problem - time for a new character.  One who has a whole pile of new Independent items, so we're back to an overpowered character.  And if we recover the prior character's items?  Now everyone gets a power-up.
 
D&D 3e required a small xp payment for creation of magic items.  Few players used the item creation feats.  Until they figured out that, if they fell a level behind, the RAW xp rules meant they gained xp faster than their peers - so they would catch up, and possibly pass, the other PCs (not "several levels ahead", but "closer to the next level").  Pathfinder just ditched the "pay xp to craft items" rule.  The process became simpler, and people used it.
 
SUMMARY:  To me, at least, Independent mechanically does one of two things (leaving aside the Cult of Steve):
 
 - it makes creating items (e.g. magic items) a character-weakener by sucking away their character points.
 - it makes characters who fluctuate in power over time, starting out overpowered and eventually becoming underpowered.
 
I find neither desirable in game.  YMMV.

Regarding the "focus doesn't really have the power".  That's a personal focus.  The easiest example is Dumbo's feather.  Dumbo needs the feather to fly, because he thinks he needs it.  But if you or I grab that feather, it doesn't do anything for us.  You can keep Dumbo from flying by taking away the feather, but you don't gain anything by keeping it.
 
Regarding someone taking your focus and running away with it, that's fine.  It doesn't matter.  It's on your character sheet, you don't lose it.  Your character's point total isn't like a bank account where someone can steal from it.  Your point total is a measure of your character's power.  Steve just yoinked that dude's rocket pack?  Why can't he keep it?  Because Steve is a 350 point character, and if he had a rocket pack too, he'd be 375 points.  But this isn't a 375 game yet.  It's the same way that a guy with 15 points of wealth can't buy a bunch of cool vehicles and weapons automatically.  There's nothing really preventing him from purchasing them, but once he does that his character is a lot more powerful, and this story is about people who are less powerful than that.
 
Anyway the guy who loses his focus will get it back, or will get something equivalent back.  Captain America paid points for his shield.  It's his shield.  His character costs however many points because he's got that shield.  He can lose it temporarily during an adventure (some jerk with a robot arm grabbed it), but he'll get it back by the end of the scene because that's how it works.  Iron Man has replacement suits waiting for him, Hawkeye can always get another bow, Spider-Man knows how to make another set of webshooters, and Thor can hold out his hand and his hammer comes back.  Cap always gets his shield back because that's how the story works.  If somebody were to steal it, he'll be able to find it again, by the next adventure at the latest.  Either that, or he gets another shield (or some other weapon) to bring him back up to full points.  Remember those triangular looking forearm shields from Infinity War?
 
Sometimes a character goes through a story arc where they don't have their focus.  Thor's bitchy sister shows up and shatters his hammer.  He's down a bunch of points at the beginning of the adventure until he discovers his Super Thunder God Powers.  You see, Thor's player was getting kind of bored and he wanted to change something about the character.  "Okay," says the GM, "we'll swap out the hammer for some souped up lightning bolt powers.  Cool?"  Thor thinks cool.  By the end of the adventure, Thor has shuffled around his points and spent some saved XP.  Now he's got super lightning.  Of course by the next adventure, Thor's decided he wants this big axe thing, so the GM lets him change his points around yet again.
 
 
 

It Depends.    For the most part, yes.  Although (a) if he intends to keep it, and (b) not necessarily limited to Focus; in fact, there could be a character whose concept is that they can grant powers to others (UBO, without a Focus), and sometimes those powers are permanent, though no one can really figure out why (at the meta level, it's because they spend points to keep them).  
 
 
As I'm rereading the description (FH 6e p. 320) it doesn't actually use the UBO With Differing Modifiers rules; it specifies that the item creation spell is Instant, so presumably it's like every other Instant Power with a lingering effect (Entangle, Drain, etc.).  So, it could be recast, yes, assuming the other conditions of creating the item are met (Extra Time, expensive Expendable Foci, etc.)  
 
If you were using UBO, you'd have to follow all of the UBO rules, so, no, it couldn't be re-created.  Although as with my example above, what happens if the receiving character spends XP to "keep" the Power?  (My answer: they gain their own "copy" of the Power, that's not tied to the original grantor, and the grantor's UBO instance ends.)
 
 

Oh! I'm sorry to have made a post on a subject already being discussed. I think you've about answered my question, so I appreciate it and won't waste any more time! 😁

I rolled "batrachian" once, which got Regeneration and, I think, two hits of Heightened Endurance.  Then he got Heightened Endurance again.  His immense END resulted in several thousand hp, and Regeneration that healed a few hundred at a time.  Never really played V&V, but his 1d6 punch would likely have had enough time to KO most opponents before they wore out his outrageous hp totals...

Thanks, Bolo, but I have the conversion already.  I haven't catalogued it because I can't find the source.  (And, given the authorship, I have always considered it to be the most "cannon" of conversions   )
 
I have Different Worlds 35 on my list, but thanks for the reminder, as I hadn't catalogued it yet.  
 
Which reminds me I haven't catalogued that goofy issue of Dragon that featured "New powers for Champions!"
 
Nor can I find my notes on "Perklets."  If these were ever actually published beyond someone's blog, I'd like to add that the the catalogue as well.
 
Pretty much all I'm trying to catalogue is things that were HERO compatible sort of "out of the box," if you will: they at least had HERO stats or solid conversion notes included with the original publication. And of course, that's because anything _can_ be converted, if you have the time and desire.  
 
 
 
 
Thanks, Tribble.  So I guess it was just the DNAgents sourcebook, then.  Likely because it wasn't a V&V property, if I had to guess.
 
 
 
 
   
 
"This _means_ something....."  
 

I think it comes down to: what role do you want magic to have?
 
I prefer a low magic, low fantasy feel. So in my home setting I don't give points breaks to spells and mundane equipment is bought with money, not points. In this scenario magic works best if  it does things swords can't. So the spells I have created for the setting tend to do either do things like give bonuses to allies, heal, fly, unusual defenses, etc. Many attack spells target different defenses; so transforms, flashes, mental attacks, physical attacks based on ECV, indirect attacks. There are spells that duplicate what mundanes can do; they're not the most efficient points spend, but if a player wants to sling rocks around using magic instead of using a sling, so be it.
 
If you want more of a classic DnD style game with tonnes of powerful spells, then divide by 3. Or 5. Or whatever number you like.

Define "a lot."
 
You ask this right after an example featuring a magic flame that has burned for generations.  It was lit by a warrior mage.
 
Are there magic critters?
 
I am no different from any other writer or creator, really: I have a "tell."  With only one exception (at least, as far as the campaign ever got; I never had a reason to decide yes or no on this one) every fantasy world I have ever built has jackelopes.   Other things, each unique to their setting, of course.  However, the opening question was about law initially.  I went sideways into a culture in an attempt to explain the rule of one culture; offered a second more law-specific by way of both apology and thread tax.
 
I have no control for how it sounds to you, but if you would like to open a different thread, I will be happy to drop some beasties or some magic in there.  I have plenty of time, as the group project is stymied until I get at least the write up for the bad guy.

Why does fantasy have to have those particular tropes? Magic I'll give you, but elves'n'dwarves?  Why do they have to be there?

Hmmm...
So much wrong with this. 
Basically, if you don't have a lot of free time or don't already have experience in TTRPG then get out of my sandbox.
Yes, experienced GM's can pick up Hero and literally build anything because they have a frame of reference. 
But a game company in 2019 doesn't survive on the tiny margin of "experienced in TTRPG GM's". 
A successful TTRPG company makes new players into experienced GM's by paving the way.
This philosophy is exactly why Hero has plummeted from the #1 Supers RPG and one of the most well known universal RPG's to virtual extinction.   
But to be truthful, I a not really up to forum wars and such so I'll just bow out here.  Once the Hall of Champions opens for business I will see if I can turn my concept into reality.  Once that happens we'll find out if I am either a genius or just another idiot tripping over their own feet. 

True, but the majority of 6E adventures are not beginner friendly and can be hard to use as a starting point for a campaign for a new GM. 
 
The fantasy related adventures/settings do not contain usable magic that can be used right now by a novice player that just wants to play.  What spell "lists" there are intermix high and low power spells buried in walls of build stat text rather than a simple what it does in game and a simple cost. 
 
The Hero Grimoire is a perfect example, fantastic resource for the experience Hero player, mind melting horror for a beginner.
 
All of the current 6E Settings suffer from "here is a setting but we don't actually want to give you anything specific that can actually be used by a PC in the dice rolling part of the game" syndrome. 
 
The adventures assume that the players have access to detailed character builds elsewhere. 
 
Evermist is a cool adventure/mini-campaign but it lacks any actual how to build PCs for this adventure" details.
 
If I had never heard of Hero and bought Fantasy Hero Complete plus Evermist I would not be able to actually play it anytime soon. 
 
That is the missing piece IMO, a adventure combo that guides players into quickly (same day) playing.  Getting a product give a fully playable , fully playable and hopefully fun adventure with examples.

Same.  While I don't mind "doing medieval" once in a while, I'd prefer to really invest in something new.  Honestly, I am _delighted_ by the existence of urban fantasy.  Don't get me wrong: I absolutely _detest_ it, but I'm very pleased that it _exists_.  It's a slap in the face to all who have ever told me that "Fantasy means X".  It's my fantasy, damn it!  And more often than not, you will find that my fantasy contains few kingdoms, very little medieval Europe, no elves, no dwarves, damned few giants, and a credulity-straining number of thick-thighed brunettes with muscular calves!
 
Wait....   I think I'm mixing things here.....
 
 
 
 
I could be wrong here, and don't presume to speak for someone else, but I _suspect_, based on my own irritation with the trope, is the _generic_ part: it's all the same bunch of talking heads, appointed the same way, doing the same thing, handing down verdicts and edicts without anything _behind_ those decisions.  They all work the same way; they all do the same thing; they all have the same intrigues.  This goes all the way up to the freakin' Jedi Council that Lucas thought we should give a crap about.  Well, the best way to make us care about something is to not let us in on anything more than the talking heads aspect, apparently.
 
 
 
 
 
Keep typing, but for the love of all that's holy, DO NOT EAT!   Dude, I wouldn't wish that on anyone!
 
 
Seriously though; how are things on your end?
 
 
 
Not at all.  I _wanted_ to share, but couldn't seem to summon any words....   Happens from time to time.  I'll finish out with a small "bonus."
 
Thank you.  I'd like to say "Oh, well, it was inspired!  It came to me --- " blah blah blah."
 
But the fact is the players happened across a band of nomads, and got lucky enough to get in their good graces (instead of their stewpots).  They adventured the next _several_ sessions both working with the caravan and using it as a sort of "base of operations."  The more they worked with the nomads, the more they got entangled, the more they needed to know, the more they wanted to know, etc--- well, you know how that goes.  I kept notes as things developed; worked on them between games, etc, and focused on "there is not a kingdom and there are no serfs!"   In short, whether they realized it or not, as is so often the case in my worlds, the _players_ designed it, if only through questioning and creating a need.
 
For example, I really wanted them to be in a secluded area, but I needed a _huge_ crowd (of both possible suspects and possible allies, for the particular scenario), but how to make that happen?  How about a big nomad get-together?  Well that's freakin' bland and over-used.  Why are they getting together?  Seasonal tradition?  Spouse shopping?  Elections?
 
Once you decide on a couple of reasons, you have to put them together:  a new leader.  Nobility?  Maybe.  He must be from a different Clan; the law expressly states that no man can be leader twice, and no Clan may lead a consecutive season.  And then the rest falls out-- even the "what is written" stuff.
 
 
 
As to that "bonus:"   In one of my rare kingdoms, law was based on the Flame of Truth.  The founder of the kingdom, a warrior mage, in order to know the virtue of his Knights, summoned incredible power to create an everlasting flame in his courtyard.  In front of this flame, his knights would recite their oaths.  Periodically, in the presence of the spoken truth, the flame would burn more fiercely.  (Detect: spoken truth, 14-).  It was spotty at best, but quiet reassuring when it worked.
 
As the ages passed, the entire kingdom took to resolving disputes in front of the Flame of Truth.  You see, at "game time," the rightful king was gone far abroad (and had, in truth, died, as this "king" had left nearly forty years prior), and the regent he had appointed had unfortunately died of sword poisoning.  To be fair, if the sword _hadn't_ been poisoned, he likely would have died of sepsis, which is far, far more awful.  
 
Appointed judges would stand behind the flame and hear testimony from each side; both sides were allowed to have their personal clergyman represent them (sort of lawyer / guidance councilor / character witness).  All cases could be brought before the Flame up to three times.  If neither side could get a response from the Flame in three cases, both sides were judged negatively.  If both sides got a reaction from the Flame, the judge and clergymen would work to find a reasonable solution, with each side taking a binding oath before the Flame.  If only one side got a reaction, then the other was declared to be at fault / guilty what-have-you.  Your life generally went downhill after the Flame had lit for your opponent, but not for you.  As time went on, the entire society began to pride itself (quite wrongly) on being scrupulous, honest, truthful people who could not be deceived.
 
No amount of science was going to sway a decision made by the Flame.  Was it an idea law system?  No; not really.  And that, I think, is why it was believable for the players.