The following is an overly fancy way of asking a question suggested in Borel Measures: Atoms vs. Point Masses
Let $\phi$ be a property that topological spaces can have (such as "compact", "$T_1$", etc.) and let $M(\phi)$ be the statement "There exists a topological space $X$ with property $\phi$, and a nontrivial, countably additive, 0-1 valued Borel measure on $X$ which is not a point mass." (For the purposes of this question, a measure $\mu$ is a point mass if there exists $a \in X$ such that $\mu(A) = 1$ iff $a \in A$.)
For various values of $\phi$, what is the consistency strength of $M(\phi)$?
A few examples:
$M(\text{compact Hausdorff})$ is a theorem of ZFC (let $X = [0,\omega_1] = \omega_1+1$ with the order topology, and consider the Dieudonné measure.)
$M(\text{finite discrete})$ is inconsistent with ZFC.
$M(\text{separable metrizable})$ is also inconsistent with ZFC, as I show in this answer.
$M(\text{discrete})$ is implied by "there exists a measurable cardinal", and if I understand the Wikipedia article correctly, they are actually equivalent. It's known that this has greater consistency strength than ZFC but is not known to be inconsistent.
I would be particularly interested in knowing about $M(\text{metrizable})$ and $M(\text{completely metrizable})$.