Multiform... maybe old question...

[RDU Neil]

Multiform states that the "true form" must pay the cost of the "most expensive form/5"

That's fine. I have a 300 pt. character with a 300 pt. second form, so the true form pays 60 pts. out of the 300 points they have to play with.

Then the character earns experience. Now the "true form" has 20 EXP... and is more expensive than the second form... so is it NOW the most expensive form, and thus HAS to pay four more points into the Multiform cost for a total of 64?

That is how the rule reads... unless the "true form" is not considered as part of the "forms" when figuring out what is the "most expensive form."

Some clarification, please? I could find nothing in the Rule FAQ.

If the former is the case. Then a character starting at 300 points, with a Multiform of 200 pts., would originally pay 60 points, even though their only form is 200... correct?

If the latter is the case, and the true form is kept out of the "most expensive form" consideration... then it makes more sense, but can be very easily abused, as a 200 pt. "true form" could be a normal with a five hundred points "most expensive form" and spend 100 points for this... and then spend all their time in their expensive form.


I'm sure this has been answered before, but I'd appreciate some help, here.

Thanks

[MisterVimes]

The true form is excluded from the "Most expensive form"

[Monolith]

Here is what I could find in the Rules FAQ:

Q: Does every Experience Point earned and spent by the true form automatically give 5 Character Points to each of his alternate forms?

A: No. The basic rule for Multiforms and Experience Points is on 5E 138.

Q: If a character spends an Experience Point on his existing Multiform power, does each alternate get 5 Character Points to spend, or only the most powerful alternate, or what?

A: If a character spends points to improve his Multiform power, he has to decide what they go toward. He could use them to increase the number of forms, for example, in which case he just expands his options without increasing the “strength” of any form.

If you spend points with the intention of increasing the “strength” of (points used to build) the forms you can change into, each 1 Character Point you spend on Multiform increases the points in the most expensive form by 5 Character Points. That effect “cascades down,” if you will, increasing the points in every other form by 5 as well (assuming that’s appropriate and desired — some forms might, and should, stay exactly as they are, without ever improving, over the course of a character’s career).

Of course, this requires a certain amount of common sense. In effect this can quintuple the effectiveness of Experience Points spent on Multiform, leading to unbalancingly powerful forms. A player should have a good reason for wanting to increase the strength of his Multiforms this way, and the GM should review the power before approving the expenditure.

One good check on the whole situation is to allow a player to spend only 1 Experience Point of every 6 he earns on his Multiform. That way, the true form improves by 5 points for every 5 points his Multiform(s) improve by.

Q6: Wouldn’t it work better to treat Experience Points spent as dropping directly to the Base Points of the true form for the purpose of figuring the Disadadvantage requirement of alternate forms? By this method — spending points buying off true form Disadvantages cascades down to the Disadvantages of all alternate forms 1:1, and spending points improving the true form’s Characteristics/Powers/Skills/Talents/Perks means a choice between a 1:1 reduction of Disadvantages in the alternate forms or spending additional points from the true form for a 1:5 increase in Characteristics/Powers/Skills/Talents/Perks for the alternate forms.

A6: No, the method described above works better. First, your suggested method assumes the forms all lose Disadvantages at the same rate, and that’s not a safe assumption. Many alternate forms remain pretty much unchanged throughout the course of a character’s career, neither gaining abilities nor losing Disadvantages. Second, there’s no reason the true form’s earning and expenditure of Experience Points should automatically be reflected in the alternate forms, whether at a 1:1 rate or any other. The fact that the multiple forms share the same body does not mean they necessarily share the same experiences, grow and learn at the same rate, or experience the same changes. Thus, only points spent on the Multiform Power itself should have any effect.

Let me try to illustrate by example, though that’s a dangerous method. Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that you build the Hulk using Multiform. Banner is the true form; the Hulk is the alternate form. One game, the character spends most of his time as Banner, roleplaying and exploring a new city he’s visiting. He earns 2 Experience Points, and puts them into a CK 11- of the city itself (or some other KS). Why should that have any effect on the Hulk form? The Hulk doesn’t share Banner’s knowledge and hasn’t gained anything from his experiences. There’s no reason he should automatically gain 2 points’ worth of anything, or lose 2 points’ worth of Disadvantages.

On the other hand, let’s suppose there’s an adventure spent mostly as the Hulk, fighting bad guys and whatnot. The character’s true form — Banner — earns 2 Experience Points for this. Since he hasn’t done anything to earn them, and has had no experiences that would allow him to improve himself, he should spend those points on his Multiform, to improve the Hulk form in some way. (Or, if the GM prefers, save the points until he can spend 5 on himself and 1 on the Hulk, or whatever.) Based on the Hulk’s experiences, the expenditure of points on Multiform might be used to make him stronger, tougher, more intelligent, give him a KS of the foe he just defeated, or the like. Or, it could be used to buy down a Disadvantage; maybe the events of the adventure taught him anger management and reduced his Berserk.

In some situations, such as the suit of Vari-Armor described in one of the Multiform examples on 5E 137, the player must track the changes from character to character closely, because there’s not really a “change” taking place in the person himself. The guy in the armor learns the same stuff regardless of how he configures his suit, so he needs to be sure to augment his forms to reflect the KSs and other stuff he himself learns. But he could improve the “strength” of one armor configuration without touching the others. In the case of the strongest suit of armor, he would spend points on his Multiform, creating 1:5 “Experience Points” for the form, and which would cascade down to the others (and be ignored, if he had no reason to improve those suits). For the lesser suits, he could wait for some cascading points later on, or (more likely) it would require the GM’s permission to boost them a little, within the confines of the points in the strongest suit. (This is similar to adding Nightvision to an owl after you forgot it, as discussed above, but in a different context and requiring even more GM monitoring.)

[RDU Neil]

So the rule is basically, "If you have multiform, you get five experience points for every one that the other players get."
As a bonus, the GM has to ride roughshod on how those points are spent, essentially telling the player what to do with the experience, causing conflict in the group, to maintain ANY semblance of balance in the game.

Absolutely, ridiculously stupid. That is utterly moronic.(Not you, Monolith... the person who made that rule.)

You build a character with an interesting concept, and find yourself gaining EXP five times faster than the rest of the group. Billy Batson never changes, but Captain Marvel gets five times the experience. If you play the character like Prime, from the Ultraverse comics, there is no reason ever to change back into the child form, and the player gets five times the rate of power growth as other players... because of an utterly broken rule. One that was NOT broken in 4th Edition, because the "true form" had to be the most expensive. That, at least, made some sense, if somewhat limiting. This new ruling is not just abusable... it is flat out unplayable.

[feywulf]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
So the rule is basically, "If you have multiform, you get five experience points for every one that the other players get."
As a bonus, the GM has to ride roughshod on how those points are spent, essentially telling the player what to do with the experience, causing conflict in the group, to maintain ANY semblance of balance in the game.

The multiforms do not get 5 exp per exp given to the true form. A multiform gets as many points as the true form spends on it, with the following restriction. Any points that the multiform has beyond the total of basepoints and experience of the true form must be accounted for with disadvantages. A character with multiform can spend 1 out of every 5 experience points to keep his multiforms as experienced as the true form. A multiform may have more disadvantages than the true form and isn't spending any of its points on multiform, and thus may have more points than the true form.

At least that is what i think that the write up for multiform in 5th edition means.

[archermoo]

Originally posted by RDU Neil
So the rule is basically, "If you have multiform, you get five experience points for every one that the other players get."
As a bonus, the GM has to ride roughshod on how those points are spent, essentially telling the player what to do with the experience, causing conflict in the group, to maintain ANY semblance of balance in the game.

Absolutely, ridiculously stupid. That is utterly moronic.(Not you, Monolith... the person who made that rule.)

You build a character with an interesting concept, and find yourself gaining EXP five times faster than the rest of the group. Billy Batson never changes, but Captain Marvel gets five times the experience. If you play the character like Prime, from the Ultraverse comics, there is no reason ever to change back into the child form, and the player gets five times the rate of power growth as other players... because of an utterly broken rule. One that was NOT broken in 4th Edition, because the "true form" had to be the most expensive. That, at least, made some sense, if somewhat limiting. This new ruling is not just abusable... it is flat out unplayable.

So you didn't even bother to read what was posted then. Sigh...

One of the most important things in what Monolith copied over was the "One good check on the whole situation is to allow a player to spend only 1 Experience Point of every 6 he earns on his Multiform. That way, the true form improves by 5 points for every 5 points his Multiform(s) improve by." portion of the exercise. But rather than actually reading what was written, you feel the need to make a personal attack against Steve.

[Agent X]

Originally posted by archermoo
So you didn't even bother to read what was posted then. Sigh...

One of the most important things in what Monolith copied over was the "One good check on the whole situation is to allow a player to spend only 1 Experience Point of every 6 he earns on his Multiform. That way, the true form improves by 5 points for every 5 points his Multiform(s) improve by." portion of the exercise. But rather than actually reading what was written, you feel the need to make a personal attack against Steve.

Well, let's not make too big a deal out of a blunt criticism of a rule, a criticism that I think is unfounded. I think someone who doesn't like multiform as it is written should try to write up the multiform rules and achieve a better balance to gain some perspective.

[archermoo]

Originally posted by Agent X
Well, let's not make too big a deal out of a blunt criticism of a rule, a criticism that I think is unfounded. I think someone who doesn't like multiform as it is written should try to write up the multiform rules and achieve a better balance to gain some perspective.

I wouldn't have mentioned it at all, but he specifically stated that the epitaphs he used were to apply to the person who wrote the rule. He didn't say the rule itself, he went out of his way to specifically say "the person who made that rule".

[RDU Neil]

It is moronic, and I have a problem with anyone who doesn't see that.

>>> "One good check on the whole situation is to allow a player to spend only 1 Experience Point of every 6 he earns on his Multiform. That way, the true form improves by 5 points for every 5 points his Multiform(s) improve by." <<<

So if this was intended to be the case, why isn't it in FReD? There is an entire paragraph under Multiform dedicated to how to spend EXP, and it doesn't even mention this kind of required GM oversight. It is still saying, "Here's a power that, as written, is abused by spending any EXP to improve extra forms, so you have to have special oversight on it. Not just special oversight at creation, but continual oversight, every time EXP is rewarded."

This isn't a "Spyglass" or "Stop Sign" issue where a power MIGHT be abusable or over powered in certain situations, this is a power, by definition, that unbalances a character... period.

I you want a better write-up... here it is.

Multiform costs 1pt per 5pts of POTENTIAL character points in a second form. Example... 60 points buys 300 POTENTIAL points that have to be filled up by Base points (equal to the true characters base points), Disadvantages (equal to the true characters disadvantages, more or less if GM allows during construction), and Experience.

Example... starting true character is 300 points, 150 bsae and 150 disads. Second form is 300 points, 150 base points and 150 disads. When EXP is earned, the player can choose whether to spend to spend the points on the True character or on the second form.

If the character chooses to spend EXP on the secondary form, it can't put the forms total point over the POTENTIAL total, as determined by the Multiform cost. Example... a 60 point multiform means a MAX 300 point second form... so if you wanted to spend 5 EXP on the second form, you'd have to spend 1 pt on the Multiform cost... now 61... and you get the POTENTIAL for five more points, which is then filled with 5 EXP. Six points of EXP gain only 6 points of powers/skills spread among the two forms. 1 into Multiform, five into actual skills/powers whatever on the second form.

If you do it the way suggested earlier, you still net 10 EXP for every 6. Five for the true form, and five for the secondary form. Still unbalanced. Even more so if you have multiple forms. Then it is 10 + 5 for every form beyond the second... all for 6 points. That's nuts!

My way, it's one for one, like every other character. The player does have to pay 6 points for every five it wants to increase the second form... but this is a small price for the flexibility of having two unique characters and the ability to switch between them. Think of it like a control cost on a VPP (cheaper by far 1 per five, instead of 1 per 2) where the VPP is limited to the second character. You can't increase the VPP without increasing the control cost... and you certainly don't increase the VPP by ONLY increasing the control cost. You have to put points into both. Why should Multiform break this common concept?

Answer: It doens't have to, it shouldn't, and with my write up, it won't.

[archermoo]

Ah, the "I'm right, you're wrong, and if you disagree you're a moron to boot" defense. Gee, I guess I should've seen that one comming.

So your "fix" for multiform is to make sure that people that use it fall further and further behind the curve as more and more XP are given out. Yes, they have more forms available to them, but each one keeps getting less and less powerful compared to the other characters in the campaign. Yeah, that's balanced.

[Tom McCarthy]

I wish people wouldn't bring up this Supreme argument again and again. I haven't read the comic, but the argument is that the character's true form is an incompetent or child, but he resumes it very, very rarely, if at all.

Any GM worth any salt isn't going to let the true form be one the player never assumes or uses.

In my campaign, a player with that Supreme concept would quickly find that the superheroic form is the true or base form, and he's paying just a few points to be able to multiform to a child (probably covered by an accidental change disadvantage).

But then, I am a GM who runs "roughshod" over his players. I wouldn't let one player have a 10D6 RKA. Another was prevented from being SPD 7. I made another buy LS to complement his FTL. I've even handed out experience points and dictated where they must be spent ("Last night's adventure netted you each 3 XP, which have been spent on Favour: Kris Kringle").

[Storn]

I'm the player with the character in question.

I originally built the character, Drake, with some powers Only In Hero ID. Then, in an order to get to know 5th somewhat, I decided I would try the character as a multiform, the concept can certainly accept it. OIHD is looking more and more like the "easier" way to do it. I don't really care if I get more points one way or the other.

It was just in OIHD, my powers were getting a bit complex in that I had powers and abilities in my "normal" form. I'm playing a martial artist who is 1/2 dragon. In a campaign of "other" dragon "avatars".

With multiform, there is a real reason to improve the Drake form. The campaign has us tapping into primal powers But, the 1/5 ratio (or 6exp to tru form, 1 =5 for multi form) is a real deal.

I only have one multiform. I have no plans on getting another.

As for Neil's frustration, yeah, Neil, ya might have overstated it <g>. But the passage on Multiform is badly worded and/or crafted. From the write up, I'm not sure if I increase my true form's, Kevin, multiform cost, then I get 1 pt or 5 pts. If it is 1 pt, then that is a rip-off and makes no sense, because I'm paying 2 pts for every pt. Other characters will quickly exceed me. If it is 5 pts, that is too much. Then I will quickly exceed everyone else. And if I do get 5 pts (per 1 true form pt), then do I have to buy a Disad to balance the cost?

I think the simplest fix is that you CAN put XP on the multiform. It is 1 pt after character creation. So I get 3 xp during an adventure. I can put all or none of it on any form, but I only get a total of 3. This isn't overpowering or underpowering and its fair... AND IT IS SIMPLE!!!

[MisterVimes]

Originally posted by archermoo
So you didn't even bother to read what was posted then. Sigh...

One of the most important things in what Monolith copied over was the "One good check on the whole situation is to allow a player to spend only 1 Experience Point of every 6 he earns on his Multiform. That way, the true form improves by 5 points for every 5 points his Multiform(s) improve by." portion of the exercise. But rather than actually reading what was written, you feel the need to make a personal attack against Steve.

That's exactly the way we've been adjudicating that rule. My wife has the only Multiform character in the group and Her 'Primary form' is at 421 points and the 'Secondary Form' is at 420. I find it keeps the balance and prevents "Capatin Marveling" were a PC has a MUCH weaker form and spends ALL their points to upgrade the Muliform... there is always someone who wants to do that, essentially getting 5x the xp you give everyone else.

[Storn]

Originally posted by Tom McCarthy
I wish people wouldn't bring up this Supreme argument again and again. I haven't read the comic, but the argument is that the character's true form is an incompetent or child, but he resumes it very, very rarely, if at all.

Any GM worth any salt isn't going to let the true form be one the player never assumes or uses.

In my campaign, a player with that Supreme concept would quickly find that the superheroic form is the true or base form, and he's paying just a few points to be able to multiform to a child (probably covered by an accidental change disadvantage).

But then, I am a GM who runs "roughshod" over his players. I wouldn't let one player have a 10D6 RKA. Another was prevented from being SPD 7. I made another buy LS to complement his FTL. I've even handed out experience points and dictated where they must be spent ("Last night's adventure netted you each 3 XP, which have been spent on Favour: Kris Kringle").

Tom, I'm playing a character who is a decent, if not smarter and more skilled, martial artist than his "Drake" persona. Kevin doesn't always want to be Drake. No disad, I just role-play it out. Kevin has Find Weakness with martial arts, Drake doesn't. Drake is a helluva lot tougher and stronger though. Both forms have advantages. So the Supreme paradigm is not at work here. I am in my "true form" a lot.

And I'm a player, as Neil can tell you, who gets very angry being "run over roughshod". Suggestions are fine. And sometimes I don't have a place to spend xp and I'll ask Neil's opinion. but I work closely with a GM on xp spending and the character is MINE, not yours. A GM has the whole REST of the world to play with/in. I only have this one insignificant representative in that world (Ok.. caught me, in RDU, I have about 25 PCs, but you get the point).

Hey, I'm a GM too. I don[t want to shanghai a campaign, I want a good story. Cooperation is the best way to achieve that. And as a GM, I might give out an EXTRA xp for Favor: Kris Kringle. But I would never make the players buy the favor.

But we are lucky. We have players who are not mini-maxers. We also have multiple characters, so if someone wants to play a combat machine/monster, he can do so. but the next character will explore a whole different avenue.

Your mileage varies. As long as your players are happy, I guess that is cool.

[Monolith]

Personally, I just give XPs to each of the forms separately. If the Hulk does something to earn 3 XP, he gets 3 XP. If Banner does something to earn 3 XP, he gets 3 XP. After the original creation I just let each character develope on their own. The fact that the Hulk might get 20 point more powerful without Banner paying 4 points really is not an issue to me.