Is taking a headquarters smaller than Small in order to get equipment points legit?

Question

I'm familiarizing with the rules of Mutants & Masterminds 3e, and beginning to create my own hero from scratch. I'm trying my hardest to squeeze my concept into the limits for a character starting with a power level of 10.

One thing I noticed is that you can get a Small-sized Headquarters with 6 Toughness for 0 equipments points. You can however decrease this size from Tiny to Miniscule (the latest one being basically just a room) to save points. What the rule say about size decrease is:

Each increase in size category costs 1 point, each decrease in size category gives you an additional point to spend elsewhere on your headquarters, although you’re not going to have a lot of room for extras!

Let's say my character lives in a cramped apartment, allowing him to decrease the equipment point cost to -2. He invest in the Living Space feature, but has not enough place to fit any other feature.

So the cost of my apartment would be -2 (Size: Diminutive) + 0 (Toughness 6) + 1 (Living Space) = -1.

Do I end up with an extra point to invest somewhere else, or do I lose it?

I'm seeing nothing RAW that prevents you from getting equipment with a negative cost (but I may simply have missed it). It's seems only fair I can invest a point somewhere else, since I penalized myself by taking a smaller headquarters.

But since the RAW say "to spend elsewhere on your headquarters", I'm not sure if it imply that the point must be spent on the headquarters. Furthermore, looking at the Alternate Headquarters section:

In the event that a character has more than one headquarters, such as hidden bases scattered around the world, the others are treated as Alternate Equipment: the character pays the points for the most expensive HQ, then 1 equipment point for each additional HQ of the same or lesser cost. The extra headquarters are largely a convenience (for heroes visiting other areas) and insurance against the loss of any one HQ.

So technically, the first headquarters costs -1, then every following one is -1 + 1 = 0. Thus, if you can "purchase" a HQ with a negative cost, you can possess as many as you want, which seems rather game breaking if the player abuses this mechanic.

Answer 1

Each increase in size category costs 1 point, each decrease in size category gives you an additional point to spend elsewhere on your headquarters, although you’re not going to have a lot of room for extras!

There is no implication that the point saved must be spent on the headquarters. It's explicit, highlighted in bold for emphasis.

Take some more perks on the HQ to bring it up to the one point you're going to have to pay anyway.

As for your second point, the quote doesn't mean what you think it does. You can't have unlimited HQs.

the character pays the points for the most expensive HQ, then 1 equipment point for each additional HQ of the same or lesser cost.

This doesn't meant "each additional HQ costs one more point than the cost of the original". It means "pay for the most expensive original, then pay one extra point for each extra HQ."

If your downtown hero tower is 7 points, but you also have a hidden retreat upstate worth 7-or-fewer-points, you pay 8 points for both. Alternatively, if the upstate retreat was worth 9 points, you'd only pay one additional for the downtown hero tower (total of 10).

The extra headquarters are largely a convenience (for heroes visiting other areas) and insurance against the loss of any one HQ.

The extra HQs are not terribly useful because you can only be in one place at a time. You pay a single point for convenience, rather than paying full price for places you can't use simultaneously.

Answer 2

My gut feeling is that it would go by the same rules as for power flaws:

A flat-value flaw cannot reduce an effect or power’s final cost below 1 power point.

So a 0 ep or -1 ep headquarter will still cost you 1 ep. Of course, anything that the GM rules is free (many will give you a cell phone and a place to stay, albeit ones tied to your civilian ID) is free.

And the "alternate HQs" works by array rules. It's not "the next headquarter costs what the original one did, plus one", but instead "costs 1 pp as an alternate". So you could have a 33 EP headquarters and then get a second one of the same value for 1 EP and another one for 1 EP. Why so cheap? Well, you can only really use one at a time, and if someone compromises one of your headquarters, the odds are decent that they'll be able to compromise most of them by leapfrogging them (as per the usual rules for arrays, if one is disabled, they all are, not to mention that Equipment can be taken away at any time.)

So, in short, no, you really didn't find a loophole, and you're misunderstanding the rules for multiple headquarter. And ultimately, Rule 0, the GM is free to shut down any such shenanigans anyhow.

Answer 3

Yes, this is legitimate

Almost. The negative equipment cost is fine, but you're calculating the cost of additional HQ's wrong. It's one point total, per HQ, not a +1 modifier.