LoneWolf

Why do we need to eliminate either of them?  There is nothing wrong with having more options, both advantages have their place.  The whole point of the Hero System is that you can build any power you want.  Some attacks are better built as AP others may work better as PEN. 
 
 
As to the cost difference AP attacks are more useful on higher dice attacks, where PEN works well on low dice attacks. Putting AP on a low dice attack gives you less bang for the buck then PEN as the target with decent DEF can still often bounce the attack.  PEN on the other hand becomes less effective at higher dice.   

One reason for using CE is that it can have multiple combat effects.   An area filled with water could have multiple effects.  Drowning is an obvious one, but being underwater can also give penalties to running and perception rolls.  Drowning could also be done as point of NND damage with the defense holding your breath.   
 
The real question is what do you want the water to do?   
 

In a fantasy setting where the powers that be routinely intervene in mortal affairs religions are likely to be very different than they are in the real world.  In the real world proving what a god wants or even if they exist is often difficult that does not need to be the case in a fantasy world.  If a good god grants healing powers to his clerics and tells them to go heal the sick, they are going to do it.  If the deity does not want his clerics charging the poor for healing them they will not charge people for it.  If they try doing so the deity is not going to grant them the power to heal.  
 
 
Trying to make a profit off of religion does not work when the deity in question comes down and tells his “followers” to stop doing that.  So, while historically religions may charge for services that may not be true in a fantasy world.   In some cases it may be, but that depends on the nature of the deity.   If a deity wants his followers to be charitable and help others they will. 

In a fantasy setting where the powers that be routinely intervene in mortal affairs religions are likely to be very different than they are in the real world.  In the real world proving what a god wants or even if they exist is often difficult that does not need to be the case in a fantasy world.  If a good god grants healing powers to his clerics and tells them to go heal the sick, they are going to do it.  If the deity does not want his clerics charging the poor for healing them they will not charge people for it.  If they try doing so the deity is not going to grant them the power to heal.  
 
 
Trying to make a profit off of religion does not work when the deity in question comes down and tells his “followers” to stop doing that.  So, while historically religions may charge for services that may not be true in a fantasy world.   In some cases it may be, but that depends on the nature of the deity.   If a deity wants his followers to be charitable and help others they will. 

I think the default goes beyond a game and is actually reflecting the human condition.   The default hero in fiction is usually STR based.  Some modern fiction the emphasis may be on technology, but for the most part the default hero in almost any story is usually STR based.  There are of course exceptions but for the most part heroes are usually depicted as strong.   Even characters that have non-strength-based abilities that are more powerful than their strength are still usually physically strong.  
 
A perfect example of this would by Harry Dresden.  Harry is one of the strongest wizards on the planet but is still physically strong.  Even in the beginning of the series he is over 6 feet tall and is in fairly good shape.  After he became the winter knight his strength went to low superhuman level.  The only main character in that series that was not above average strength is Waldo Butters.  Even he got stronger after he became a knight of the cross.   
 
Removing figured stats in 6th edition actually removed a lot of the game mechanics favoring primary stats.  It did not on the other hand remove our human prejudices that favor strong heroes.  
 
 

Sounds like Change Environment to me.  IIRC, suffocation made it into APG I as an added to CE.

Given that we're playing a system where we can build anything... why do we have to slavishly ape the conventions of the stories Gygax et al loved?  Even by 1978 or so, when Appendix N was compiled, fantasy had gone in new directions, and in the almost 50 years since then it's gone in a lot more new directions. 
 
If you like that, play it.  More power to you, play what you enjoy.  As you note, there are a whole lot of games and settings that cater to that.  But there's a whole lot more to the fantasy genre than the authors whose heyday was the 1930's to the 1950's.  We don't need to lick the boots of D&D anymore.

I think the default goes beyond a game and is actually reflecting the human condition.   The default hero in fiction is usually STR based.  Some modern fiction the emphasis may be on technology, but for the most part the default hero in almost any story is usually STR based.  There are of course exceptions but for the most part heroes are usually depicted as strong.   Even characters that have non-strength-based abilities that are more powerful than their strength are still usually physically strong.  
 
A perfect example of this would by Harry Dresden.  Harry is one of the strongest wizards on the planet but is still physically strong.  Even in the beginning of the series he is over 6 feet tall and is in fairly good shape.  After he became the winter knight his strength went to low superhuman level.  The only main character in that series that was not above average strength is Waldo Butters.  Even he got stronger after he became a knight of the cross.   
 
Removing figured stats in 6th edition actually removed a lot of the game mechanics favoring primary stats.  It did not on the other hand remove our human prejudices that favor strong heroes.  
 
 

Having spells without having the END to cast them is pointless.  If your REC is too low you cannot maintain the spells, and takes you too long to regain the END.  You could of course buy all your spells with reduced END or 0 END, but that makes them more expensive.   Many GM’s require spells to cost some END, so 0 END may not even be an option.
 
If the GM is tracking END and using LTE spell casters need to worry about END usage.   Spell casters in my experience tend to burn through END more than any other type of character.   Unless your combat only lasts a turn or so END becomes the limiting factor on spell casters.  Unless you want your spell caster to be a 12 second wonder you need to boost END and REC.  Prior to 6th edition Boosting your primary stats was the most efficient way to do that.
 
@Christopher R Taylor  Go back to some of those old characters and look at their stats.  If you bought up your PD, ED, REC and END try rewriting them with boosted STR and END and see if they come out cheaper.   I think you will find that investing in the primary stats does not actually reduce the points you have for your spells.    
 
 Under 5th edition Buying a 36 END and 8 REC cost 16 point.   If I buy an 18 STR and 18 CON and sell back my STUN to 20 it also costs me 16 points.  But I have 2 extra PD and ED and I am harder to stun, can lift more and make STR and CON rolls easier.   

Having spells without having the END to cast them is pointless.  If your REC is too low you cannot maintain the spells, and takes you too long to regain the END.  You could of course buy all your spells with reduced END or 0 END, but that makes them more expensive.   Many GM’s require spells to cost some END, so 0 END may not even be an option.
 
If the GM is tracking END and using LTE spell casters need to worry about END usage.   Spell casters in my experience tend to burn through END more than any other type of character.   Unless your combat only lasts a turn or so END becomes the limiting factor on spell casters.  Unless you want your spell caster to be a 12 second wonder you need to boost END and REC.  Prior to 6th edition Boosting your primary stats was the most efficient way to do that.
 
@Christopher R Taylor  Go back to some of those old characters and look at their stats.  If you bought up your PD, ED, REC and END try rewriting them with boosted STR and END and see if they come out cheaper.   I think you will find that investing in the primary stats does not actually reduce the points you have for your spells.    
 
 Under 5th edition Buying a 36 END and 8 REC cost 16 point.   If I buy an 18 STR and 18 CON and sell back my STUN to 20 it also costs me 16 points.  But I have 2 extra PD and ED and I am harder to stun, can lift more and make STR and CON rolls easier.   

I think the real origin of the squishy wizard is actually D&D.  In the Lord of the Ring, it was Gandalf who faced off against the Balrog not Aragorn.  Allanon in the Sword of Shannara is certainly not squishy. In Russian history Rasputin was anything but frail.  According to the stories he was poisoned twice, shot in the chest, but still survived. He was then shot and beaten but still was not dead, finally they wrapped him up and tossed him into a freezing river.  That does not sound squishy to me.
 
If you are using 5th edition with figured stats wizards are going to buy up their CON to equal that of a warrior and if they are smart will also buy up their STR to at least 13.  In fact, buying it up to 18 would actually be advantages for the wizard.  A wizard like any other character is going to buy up his PD & ED.  Spells use a lot of END, so he will want a good END and REC.  To buy 4 PD, 4 ED, 8 REC, and 36 END cost 20 points.  If I buy up my CON and STR to 18 it costs 24 points and I get 28 STUN as well.  The math makes the idea of the squishy wizard a bad assumption when using figured stats.   This is probably one of the best arguments for ditching figured stats.
 
It seems pretty clear that the idea of the wizard as a squishy character is a false assumption until at least 6th edition.  Prior to 6th edition, it would actually be more expensive build the “traditional” squishy wizard.  Even in 6th edition there is no real reason to, but at least you are not penalized for doing so.  Neither fiction nor Hero game mechanics give any reason why wizards should be squishy.  In game systems like D&D on the other hand it is nearly unavoidable.  
 

If the GM wants to create a magic system where wizards cannot use armor or weapons, then the problem is caused by the GM.  Even in that case paying cash for equipment can still give the wizard equipment.  In a world where magic works there will be some wizards who will create magic items for sale.  This is not any different than a smith creating weapons and armor.   They may be expensive, but then so should heavy armor.  It took a lot of time and effort to create a suit of full plate.  Even without magic items components still cost money, especially if you are using difficult to replace expendable foci.  You start using those and spells get even cheaper than they already are.  
 
If you want a brick type character in Fantasy Hero a wizard is much better at pulling it off than a warrior.  With things like growth and density increase it is cheaper to build a high STR character as a wizard than it is a warrior.  One level of growth and 3 levels of density increase will boost a characters STR by +30.  Buy up the STR to 20 on this character and I have a STR of 50 giving me a 10d6 punch.   In Hero system it cost the wizard the same to buy OCV and skill levels.   This means a wizard can fight as well as a warrior for the same points.   
 

Nothing in the game prevents a wizard from using weapons or wearing armor.  My wizard in one of Gauntlets games probably had some of the best defense of the group.   I started out wearing light armor (DEF 3) but ended up with 0 weight chain (DEF 6).  The rest of the group wanted the heavier DEF armor we found.  The heavy fighter preferred the DEF 10 hardened armor to the 0-weight chain. I also had a robe that gave me an additional 5 DEF for a total of 11 resistant DEF and 17 DEF total.   In addition to this I had a spell that gave me -3 DC of both physical and energy damage negation and 10 points of mental and power defense. 
 
I also had a magic staff that in addition to boosting my magic was also an enchanted weapon.  It did an extra 2d6 above a normal quarter staff and added +2 OCV to attack, or to DCV to defend.   The character has very defensive staff based martial art for when he could not cast spells.  It had only 3 maneuvers a martial block, a marital strike and a takedown.  Since I had a decent amount of attack spells my OCV was bought to max (8).  The ring of protection I wore gave me an additional +3 DCV, so the character had a high DCV.  
 
This was a pretty high-powered campaign that had been going on for a while, so the other party members were equally well equipped.  But in the beginning of the campaign, I managed to take down a knight in full plate with my staff in one shot.  I will admit it was a critical hit to the head in a campaign using both hit location and critical hits.   The heavy fighter in the group was struggling with an identical foe.  At that point all I had was an ordinary staff and some DEF 3 armor plus my spells.  
 
Hero system is not D&D and Fantasy Hero characters are radically different from D&D characters.  It is a lot easier to build a hybrid character in Hero than it is in any D&D based system.  The fact of the matter is that wizards benefit from free equipment just as much as warriors.  
 

That is going to turn a FH game into a Champions game.  What I would do would be to track the equipment but not have the character pay for it.  That way you have an idea of their power level, but keep the feel of a FH game.  It also allows the characters to lose equipment without taking away huge amounts of points.       

If the GM wants to create a magic system where wizards cannot use armor or weapons, then the problem is caused by the GM.  Even in that case paying cash for equipment can still give the wizard equipment.  In a world where magic works there will be some wizards who will create magic items for sale.  This is not any different than a smith creating weapons and armor.   They may be expensive, but then so should heavy armor.  It took a lot of time and effort to create a suit of full plate.  Even without magic items components still cost money, especially if you are using difficult to replace expendable foci.  You start using those and spells get even cheaper than they already are.  
 
If you want a brick type character in Fantasy Hero a wizard is much better at pulling it off than a warrior.  With things like growth and density increase it is cheaper to build a high STR character as a wizard than it is a warrior.  One level of growth and 3 levels of density increase will boost a characters STR by +30.  Buy up the STR to 20 on this character and I have a STR of 50 giving me a 10d6 punch.   In Hero system it cost the wizard the same to buy OCV and skill levels.   This means a wizard can fight as well as a warrior for the same points.   
 

If the GM wants to create a magic system where wizards cannot use armor or weapons, then the problem is caused by the GM.  Even in that case paying cash for equipment can still give the wizard equipment.  In a world where magic works there will be some wizards who will create magic items for sale.  This is not any different than a smith creating weapons and armor.   They may be expensive, but then so should heavy armor.  It took a lot of time and effort to create a suit of full plate.  Even without magic items components still cost money, especially if you are using difficult to replace expendable foci.  You start using those and spells get even cheaper than they already are.  
 
If you want a brick type character in Fantasy Hero a wizard is much better at pulling it off than a warrior.  With things like growth and density increase it is cheaper to build a high STR character as a wizard than it is a warrior.  One level of growth and 3 levels of density increase will boost a characters STR by +30.  Buy up the STR to 20 on this character and I have a STR of 50 giving me a 10d6 punch.   In Hero system it cost the wizard the same to buy OCV and skill levels.   This means a wizard can fight as well as a warrior for the same points.   
 

Nothing in the game prevents a wizard from using weapons or wearing armor.  My wizard in one of Gauntlets games probably had some of the best defense of the group.   I started out wearing light armor (DEF 3) but ended up with 0 weight chain (DEF 6).  The rest of the group wanted the heavier DEF armor we found.  The heavy fighter preferred the DEF 10 hardened armor to the 0-weight chain. I also had a robe that gave me an additional 5 DEF for a total of 11 resistant DEF and 17 DEF total.   In addition to this I had a spell that gave me -3 DC of both physical and energy damage negation and 10 points of mental and power defense. 
 
I also had a magic staff that in addition to boosting my magic was also an enchanted weapon.  It did an extra 2d6 above a normal quarter staff and added +2 OCV to attack, or to DCV to defend.   The character has very defensive staff based martial art for when he could not cast spells.  It had only 3 maneuvers a martial block, a marital strike and a takedown.  Since I had a decent amount of attack spells my OCV was bought to max (8).  The ring of protection I wore gave me an additional +3 DCV, so the character had a high DCV.  
 
This was a pretty high-powered campaign that had been going on for a while, so the other party members were equally well equipped.  But in the beginning of the campaign, I managed to take down a knight in full plate with my staff in one shot.  I will admit it was a critical hit to the head in a campaign using both hit location and critical hits.   The heavy fighter in the group was struggling with an identical foe.  At that point all I had was an ordinary staff and some DEF 3 armor plus my spells.  
 
Hero system is not D&D and Fantasy Hero characters are radically different from D&D characters.  It is a lot easier to build a hybrid character in Hero than it is in any D&D based system.  The fact of the matter is that wizards benefit from free equipment just as much as warriors.  
 

Nothing in the game prevents a wizard from using weapons or wearing armor.  My wizard in one of Gauntlets games probably had some of the best defense of the group.   I started out wearing light armor (DEF 3) but ended up with 0 weight chain (DEF 6).  The rest of the group wanted the heavier DEF armor we found.  The heavy fighter preferred the DEF 10 hardened armor to the 0-weight chain. I also had a robe that gave me an additional 5 DEF for a total of 11 resistant DEF and 17 DEF total.   In addition to this I had a spell that gave me -3 DC of both physical and energy damage negation and 10 points of mental and power defense. 
 
I also had a magic staff that in addition to boosting my magic was also an enchanted weapon.  It did an extra 2d6 above a normal quarter staff and added +2 OCV to attack, or to DCV to defend.   The character has very defensive staff based martial art for when he could not cast spells.  It had only 3 maneuvers a martial block, a marital strike and a takedown.  Since I had a decent amount of attack spells my OCV was bought to max (8).  The ring of protection I wore gave me an additional +3 DCV, so the character had a high DCV.  
 
This was a pretty high-powered campaign that had been going on for a while, so the other party members were equally well equipped.  But in the beginning of the campaign, I managed to take down a knight in full plate with my staff in one shot.  I will admit it was a critical hit to the head in a campaign using both hit location and critical hits.   The heavy fighter in the group was struggling with an identical foe.  At that point all I had was an ordinary staff and some DEF 3 armor plus my spells.  
 
Hero system is not D&D and Fantasy Hero characters are radically different from D&D characters.  It is a lot easier to build a hybrid character in Hero than it is in any D&D based system.  The fact of the matter is that wizards benefit from free equipment just as much as warriors.  
 

A spell casters real advantage is the ability to use non-standard attacks.  The 2d6 HKA of a warrior always goes against resistant PD and in most cases has no advantage.  With the right weapon you might get AP or a +1 Stun multiple, but that is about it.  The weapon also has a STR MIN so you need near a 20 STR just to use it.  
 
Take a wizard with the ability to create a sword made of flame.   He buys it as a 1d6 HKA.  The spell has the following limitations OAF expendable easily replaced (Small piece of flint), requires a skill roll, incantations, gestures.   The sword goes against ED instead of PD and cost 5 points.  If the wizard has a 15 STR it does 2d6 damage.  Adding the advantage AP increases the cost to 6 and means I need a 17 STR to get it to 2d6.   My wizard also has a STR spell that gives him +7 STR for 2 points.   
 
Compare this to a warrior using a Greatsword.  The warrior needs 17 STR to use the Greatsword which costs 7 points.  He also needs WF with blades for 1 point.  He gets the Greatsword for no points and can do 2d6 damage targeting PD.  Both characters spent 8 points and have the same STR score.   The wizards attack targets ED instead of PD and gets to cut the ED in half unless the target has hardened defenses.  The warrior is visibly armed and draws attention for being dangerous.   The wizard is carrying some flint and steel (the expendable focus for the STR spell) to light fires.  
The wizard is coming out ahead in spite of the fact he has to pay for his spells.  The cost of the magic skill and booting it up high enough will be an additional cost for the wizard, but that investment gets him so much versatility and power it is well worth the points.        
 
Looking at it further the warrior is already near the normal maximum for STR where the wizard can still buy 10 more points.  This makes it easier for the wizard to increase his damage.  The wizard can also simply pay the points to increase the damage of the spells.  for an additional 10 points I can increase the damage on the spell to 2d6 and the STR to +20 to boost the damage to 4d6 AP HKA.  For the warrior to boost the damage he needs skill levels, martial maneuvers or talents.   Weapon Mastery for a very limited group costs 12 points to add +1d6, it costs 18 points to get 6 skill levels for a second dice.  At this point the wizard has spent less than half the points for a better attack.   The skill levels do give the warrior more versatility, but the wizard has 18 points unspent so can easily purchase 6 skill levels and now has better damage.  
 
The idea the wizard is at a disadvantage because he has to purchase his spells is an illusion.  In reality he will often have the advantage of having way more versatility.  This is not even factoring in the fact the wizard has a huge advantage out of combat.     
 

And remember, Fantasy Heto is not D&D. 
 
I get a little depressed, every time some young player tries to cobble together a 3.5 or 5e TSR build. It never works or is never an efficient use of points. 

There is no reason a wizard cannot wear armor, this is not D&D where a wizard cannot cast spells in armor.   A GM could setup a house rule saying a wizard cannot cast in armor, but then the problem is GM created, instead of being due to getting equipment without paying points for it.  Also there is nothing in the rules that DEF from armor cannot stack with those of a spell.   That means the wizard is likely to have better defenses than the warrior.  Even if the GM does not allow stacking a wizard could purchase his armor spell as damage negation.   
 
If you make spells cost money instead of points, do you make talents also cost money instead of points?  In reality purchasing spells and purchasing talents are pretty much the same thing.  You pay points for the ability to do something extraordinary that others cannot.  
 
As long as you have enough talents and skills available for non-casters to purchase there is no imbalance.   
 

There is no reason a wizard cannot wear armor, this is not D&D where a wizard cannot cast spells in armor.   A GM could setup a house rule saying a wizard cannot cast in armor, but then the problem is GM created, instead of being due to getting equipment without paying points for it.  Also there is nothing in the rules that DEF from armor cannot stack with those of a spell.   That means the wizard is likely to have better defenses than the warrior.  Even if the GM does not allow stacking a wizard could purchase his armor spell as damage negation.   
 
If you make spells cost money instead of points, do you make talents also cost money instead of points?  In reality purchasing spells and purchasing talents are pretty much the same thing.  You pay points for the ability to do something extraordinary that others cannot.  
 
As long as you have enough talents and skills available for non-casters to purchase there is no imbalance.   
 

If they paid character points for the item, then they get either a replacement, or a point equivalent piece of equipment.

A fighter does not get a 2d6 HKA by buying a skill level.   They get one for purchasing a sword with cash.  Why cannot a wizard buy a wand that gives him a 2d6 RKA for cash?   There is nothing that states magic items have to be rare and expensive.  The monetary cost of a magic item is not something that is set by the rules.  Your problem is being created by your own house rules.  From a game mechanic standpoint, a bow and a wand of magic missiles will cost similar points.   
 
Most FH characters I have seen eventually get magic items.  The most common magic items seem to be weapons and armor.  Logically caster focused items should be more common.  In most campaigns it is spell casters that create items.  Why are they creating so many items for other types of characters instead of for themselves?
 
Also, if casters are creating the magic items why cannot a PC caster create their own magic items?  Doing so might require a skill.  So, if the PC caster buys the equivalent of inventor, they might be able to create their own magic items.  If this is the case the caster is actually has the advantage. 
 

A fighter does not get a 2d6 HKA by buying a skill level.   They get one for purchasing a sword with cash.  Why cannot a wizard buy a wand that gives him a 2d6 RKA for cash?   There is nothing that states magic items have to be rare and expensive.  The monetary cost of a magic item is not something that is set by the rules.  Your problem is being created by your own house rules.  From a game mechanic standpoint, a bow and a wand of magic missiles will cost similar points.   
 
Most FH characters I have seen eventually get magic items.  The most common magic items seem to be weapons and armor.  Logically caster focused items should be more common.  In most campaigns it is spell casters that create items.  Why are they creating so many items for other types of characters instead of for themselves?
 
Also, if casters are creating the magic items why cannot a PC caster create their own magic items?  Doing so might require a skill.  So, if the PC caster buys the equivalent of inventor, they might be able to create their own magic items.  If this is the case the caster is actually has the advantage.