I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

[ghost-angel]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Incidently' date=' what do you make of the rule about other forms buying vehicles and bases? I think in 4th, the 'main' form paid for it, but all could use it. In 5th it seems that each form that wants to use it needs to pay. [i']Does then the 10pts I've thrown into base from each form add up and allow me to have an extremely massive base for next to no points from my 'base form'?[/i]

From my understanding ... no. Even if I got it wrong Hell No. (I have this feeling we're going to agree unanimously here...)

 

And I'm happy to keep it that way. Bases and Vehicles are alreay 1-5. Dump them into the MF and the MF has a 1-5, giving the Baseform a 1-25 if it doesn't pay for the base or vehicle. If it does then it gets the normal 1-5 and the MF Forms are 'paying' for it for the privilage of borrowing it (in essense, the main form bought it, the other forms that want to use it also buy it, thus charging you several times for one thing...)

[TheQuestionMan]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Greeting Herophiles, I just finished my character and need you to check out my POWER!!!

 

Multiform (325 Character Points in the most expensive form) (Instant Change, x4 Number Of Forms) (80 Active Points); Extra Time (Extra Phase, -3/4), Costs Endurance (Only To Change; -1/2), Increased Endurance Cost (x2 END; -1/2), Concentration (0 DCV; -1/2)

 

Cheers

 

QM

[radioKAOS]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

From my understanding ... no. Even if I got it wrong Hell No. (I have this feeling we're going to agree unanimously here...)

 

And I'm happy to keep it that way. Bases and Vehicles are alreay 1-5. Dump them into the MF and the MF has a 1-5, giving the Baseform a 1-25 if it doesn't pay for the base or vehicle. If it does then it gets the normal 1-5 and the MF Forms are 'paying' for it for the privilage of borrowing it (in essense, the main form bought it, the other forms that want to use it also buy it, thus charging you several times for one thing...)

 

Yeah, I dislike the 1-25 advantage that it would give the base form, which is why I liked the "base form pays for it" rule from 4th Ed. But then all forms got to 'use it' for free, and that may not seem fair. Of course having each form pay the same 'usage' cost seems an almost silly way of balancing it... But what other option is there?

 

I guess that's really what I was asking... "What other option is there?"

[Duke Bushido]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Perhaps then' date=' is there some way to formulate it differently for the 'just one form' guys?[/quote']

 

Well I suppose, if we are to accept that the intent was originaly a 'distrbution of wealth' sort of limiter, intended to allow each form to recieve one XP per XP gained by the 'base' form, then it should follow that a one-to-one ratio for any amount of forms up to five forms is fair. As G-A suggested, and as I have been once forced to enforce, in terms of advancement, it is not unfair. It is not by the book as the final power went to press, even in its first incarnation, but it is certainly not unfair. Thus, a character with three forms would get one XP for each form per XP the base form earned. And a character with only one form would be working a one-to-one ratio.

 

If you opt to go this route, then you have two options (at least, than I can see). First, you can opt to consider that a maximum of five points to the entire pool of alternate forms is gained for each XP the base form earns is in effect. For example, a character with seven alternates from a single base would earn gain only five points by spending an XP on his MF power. Were the base form to spend three points on MF, he would have to divide fifteen points among the seven alters, much as it is now. To the best of my knowledge, there is no limitation on how he may distribute these points among the forms, so long as each form is acceptable to the campaign and the GM.

 

The second option is of course to continue a one-to-one ratio, spread evenly across all forms. Thus, if the base form spends 2 XP, each of the seven alter forms also recives 2XP, to be spent specifically as 2 per template.

 

Each of these has inherent advantages and disadvantages, at least at a glance. (and, as it's almost time to rack-out, I'm only going to glance right now. Feel free to disect this further; that's where the fun is anyway, right? ). The first option: 1 to 5, limit 5, is a limit of sorts. It effectively slows the advancement of a large number of forms should the base character have more than five forms. While I'd like to be able to say that it is a way to help ensure game balance, it clearly isn't. A character with five or less alternate forms still has the forms themselves, and that in itself is a bit unbalancing if not handled delicately. You can easily, as has been suggested, create one character for each archetype, making the base form the most well-prepared character ever.

 

At less than five forms, the alters still progress faster than the base character, which means faster than everyone else in the campaign. At five forms, they progress at exactly the same rate, meaning that the other players will never achieve a level of utility equal to that of the MF character. Again, GM scrutiny comes into play as an equalizer.

 

But for the character with more than five alter froms, things get interesting. Primarily because this character's alternate forms, using the 1 to 5 rule, will progress more slowly than the rest of the players in the group. And a character with ten alters will see his alters progress at best average only 1/2 the rate of the rest of the group. While on the surface this may look 'bad' for the alters, it certainly is not.

 

A character with ten forms (should he be able to afford it, of course) is able to build quite a bit of specific utility into each form. Really, and alter can be built for specific utility (I hate to use the Hulk example, but there it is.....), such as pulverizing opponents while being able to completely rely on the 'base' form to deal with the day-to-day stuff. An alter needs no real skills, perks, talents, or powers outside his one specific usefulness. (in theory anyway; if we can't grant that for this discussion, then there is little need of going further.) So already a single MF has potential to leap ahead of the game.

 

A character with ten forms can leap well ahead of the game, and should he opt to go for the 'one each' approach of full-spectrum powers approach, can very quickly make the rest of the group little more than hostages (like Clark Savage Jr's travelling companions). But keeping the 1 to 5 cap in place, the forms are forced to share at best 1/2 an XP for each one the base form spends on the MF power. This slowing down of development will still allow an MF character to play an interesting concept and develop his 'specialty' forms, but the slowed rate of advancement means that there is never a chance that he will over-shadow the rest of the play group. Everybody wins. (Unless your MF player has a munchkin streak, of course). The best that such a character could do would be to seriously concentrate on one or two aspects of each form (Which I can't help but think was the primary reason for this power in the first place, the more we talk about it), or focus on one or two specific forms at a time, which is still possible as there are no spending guidelines for forms.

 

The 'one each' method provides a more balanced mechanic, as it allows each form to advance commis-- Hell, I can't spell that-- to the same degree as the other forms, the base form, and the other players. The immediate problem with this is of course that should the MF character already outshine one or more of the other players, he will continue to do so. All you have done then is to enforce the slowest possible rate of advancement on the alter forms. Granted, that is the rate that everyone else at the table will be subject to, so again, on the suface it seems fair.

 

Beyond the arguments above-- maintaining any potential discrepancies in power level amongst the players-- is another, more serious problem, and that is the character with more than five alter forms. Each form will recieve one XP for each XP the base character spends on MF. If there are ten alters, then that one XP effectively becomes ten XP. Even with a forced 'spent only on the form it belongs to' rules, that's ten XP! Should the base form win five XP on an adventure, he can effectively turn it into +1d6 on ten different powers! Nasty.

 

Obviously, there may be benefit to finding some middle ground here, but at the moment, through my sleep-addled brain, I don't see it. Sad, really, because I saw it quite clearly when I started all this typiing. .

 

For the moment, however, I think that perhaps one for one, with a limit of one for five, may be the best thing going for those GMs whose players are finding regular and repeated abuses for MF. Thus, the Hulk does not turn 3 XP into 3d6 of STR, but can still advance every bit as quickly as the other characters at the table. This has the additional advantage of actively slowing the advancement of 'I can do every possible thing' guy a bit after he's built those ten or twelve forms. Either way, game balance is thrown less out of kilter than the currently used system of 1 to 5, period.

 

Let me reitterate that this suggestion-- one-to-one, should probably be used only be GMs who are finding serious problems with MF characters at their tables. I am by no means suggesting that we toss the current rulebook away and write an all new one; I am merely pondering some potential 'optionals.' And frankly, the more I think about it, the more I like the idea.

 

Incidently' date=' what do you make of the rule about other forms buying vehicles and bases?[/quote']

 

Oh, bless you! This is an _outstanding_ question, I think, and one that hadn't even occured to me with MF. In the past, we always just assumed that the base form paid it with experience that would have otherwise gone to the alters, and considering the alter's normal rate of return on invested XPs, the loss of considerable potential gain (yes, it's a valid concept. Or so my accountant tells me) served as the investment of the alters themselves. I really, really want to go into this subject some more, if anyone else is willing to discuss it. Unfortunately, it won't be tonight-- I'm up late enough. But excellent question, and one I really would like to explore some more!

 

The only thought that I have on it right now is that perhaps we unwittingly were using the best answer all along, at least under the current rules. After all, at the one-to-five discounted rate of advancement, one XP from an alter only cost him 0.2 XP under the current rules. Hell, if alters are allowed to 'chip in' for a base, an MF character with a single alter form is getting a Hell of a lot for his investment:

 

Hmmm.... Let's see..... Earn three XP...... Multiply by Five for investing in alter..... Multiply again for Base discount....... You know, I think I'll invest two more XP; I'd like a couple of cars, too!........

 

I don't have a real issue with allowing alters to use the base. After all, they were deprived a lot of potential advancement (under the current rules, anyway) so that the base form could pay for the base. And theoretically, they are the same character. I can see not wanting certain alters running around: "Hulk smash million dollar thingy!"

But in general, I don't have a problem with it. Duplicates get a lot trickier, but that's for another thread, I think.

 

Now, if I can get some rest and some work and perhap some more rest, then I will have a fresh mind tomorrow evening, and might be able to participate in discussion again.

 

Night all!

[ghost-angel]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Yeah, I dislike the 1-25 advantage that it would give the base form, which is why I liked the "base form pays for it" rule from 4th Ed. But then all forms got to 'use it' for free, and that may not seem fair. Of course having each form pay the same 'usage' cost seems an almost silly way of balancing it... But what other option is there?

 

I guess that's really what I was asking... "What other option is there?"

None that I can think that has any elegance to it. Or even any logic.

 

If anyone has an idea, I'm all open on this one.

 

...

perhaps something like the +5 Doubling rule on Equipment? Each Other Form pays 5pts to use the base or vehicle (per base and vehicle). I dunno, even that sounds kinda off...

[Duke Bushido]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

I guess that's really what I was asking... "What other option is there?"

 

Under the current rules, the option that occurs to me is to keep in mind that all the forms are the character who paid for it.

 

Only if you adopt some of the other suggestions from this conversation-- particularly any of the one-to-one suggestions, does it even make number sense to charge the other forms. Of course, that's tantamount to charging the same character [# of forms] times what everyone else is paying, but frankly, they got that experience for free, so there's still an element of the gimmie.

 

If you go with one-for-one, limit five, it becomes reasonably fair to charge the additional forms after ten forms. But even then, half of what they are paying was still free, it just took a lot longer to gain.

 

keep in mind that I was headed to bed (and still am, as soon as this goes up), so my numbers may be good and way off, but from what I'm seeing in my head, it only makes sense that the base character pays for the base, and all other forms use it. The only possible exceptions are if there exists and alter that is distinctly _not_ the base form, such as that demon motorcycle guy whose name escapes me......

 

And I'm certainly not going to think about how to charge him tonight.

 

Again;

 

'Night all.

[ghost-angel]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Now, if I can get some rest and some work and perhap some more rest, then I will have a fresh mind tomorrow evening, and might be able to participate in discussion again.

 

Night all!

none of what you said permeated my brain and made any damn sense to me. But you're tired and I had one of those weeks today.

 

my suggestion, for clarification, is also Steve's which is:

Base Form gets Experience normally, and is the only form that gets experience. It may spend points in powers normally (including Multiform) but ... since MF is a 1-5 ratio gain the GM should cosider allowing only 1 of every 5 points of Experience the Base Form earns going into Muliform. Thus you start with 350 BF and a 225 MF, the BF is now 355 and puts another point into MF thus resulting in a 230 MF (355 Point Base Form with 230 point Multif Form).

 

Consider this build on a Many Form Multiform:

Powered Armor Guy has:

Base Form - Multiform with x3 Forms, some all purpose but fairly light Light Powered Armor (low attack, low def, low movement).

Form 1: Offensive Armor Configuration, He no changes into his Full Powered Armor, this configuration has slightly higher than normal Offensive powers, but lower defenses and average movement.

Form 2: Defensive Armor Configuration, with a push of a button his armor reroutes power into Force Fields from weapons giving him slightly higher Defensive powers, lowered attack powers and average movement.

Form 3: High Speed Chase Armor Configuration, another push of a button and the power again reroutes into Movement powers of higher than normal and various kinds, but lowers his defenses to average and offensive powers to lower than normal.

 

As the game progresses everyones Offensive and Defensive capabilitie rise to meet new challanges, thus Powered Armor Guy's armor now has average stats across the board and depending on the configuration could even be low. So he spends some points in Multiform from his base form (which has been mostly getting more skills, some contacts and improvin the Light Armor slightly) to raise the Offensive Configurations attacks to just above the curve (as they were before) and raise the defenses so it's still low for the game but won't be too low, likewise the other forms shift upwards to keep 'leve' as they were before.

 

I see no reason to penalize the Other Forms at a 1-1 or 1-2 basis (or other ratio) personally. Every 1 point in MF is always 1-5, thus giving each Armor Configuration another 5 points to play with each time MF is increase by 1 point on the Base Form. But - he can only do this 20% of the time he receives experience, and then only to make sure his various configurations (the GM caveat portion) stay within the present guidelines that were initially allowed.

 

Pointing out that MF can be used for more than a Banner/Hulk relationship.

 

Or Animal Man:

Base Form buys a 150 point Multiform initially for a Bird Form (turns into a Hawk or something similar). Later he wants to turn into a Wolf, but that's a 220 Point Form so he starts to put points into Multiform to get the Other Form from 150 to 220 Max (35 Experience at 1-5). The Hawk Form is done, all he's doing with every point into MF is getting close to turning into the Wolf by increasing the Max Points In Other Form limit, even if he never uses them for some forms (like his Hawk).

 

--

Just tossing out reasons to not penalize the Ratio of Multiform by lowering it from 1-5 to something else.

 

Of course, anyone who sits at the table and thinks they're gonna abuse the Multiform better be preprared to handle a 1-2 Ration instead just for being a Munchkining little twerp.

 

I have no idea if I made any sense...

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Yeah, I dislike the 1-25 advantage that it would give the base form, which is why I liked the "base form pays for it" rule from 4th Ed. But then all forms got to 'use it' for free, and that may not seem fair. Of course having each form pay the same 'usage' cost seems an almost silly way of balancing it... But what other option is there?

 

I guess that's really what I was asking... "What other option is there?"

 

To my mind, each MultiForm is a separate character. If that character wants something, that character payus for it. The Hulk doesn't keep Bruce Banner's scientific skills unless he also buys them. He also doesn't keep Bruce's perk of access to a military lab (when Bruce was an army scientist), nor can he drive Bruce Banner's car.

 

If your muktiforms are so similar that they should all have access to the base and the vehcile, then they should all spend the points for access to the base and the vehicle. If they have lots of points in common, maybe the Multiform construct is not the most appropriate approach. OIHID might be an option, or perhaps even a large Multipower, with slots for each of your many alternate forms.

[LadyChaos]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

If they have lots of points in common' date=' maybe the Multiform construct is not the most appropriate approach. OIHID might be an option, or perhaps even a large Multipower, with slots for each of your many alternate forms.[/quote']

 

I'm glad you mentioned OIHID (though I hope we don't get another OIHID discussion!). If I have a PC that started out at 375 pts (175 in CPs and 200 in disads) that was originally written as OIHID. They share some skills, but the "normal" form is a normal, no powers. Should the PC be rewritten as a multiform? If so, what would be the point breaks. I have never understood how it works either. *G* Which explains why I haven't re-written the PC!

[Hawksmoor]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

From my understanding ... no. Even if I got it wrong Hell No. (I have this feeling we're going to agree unanimously here...)

 

And I'm happy to keep it that way. Bases and Vehicles are alreay 1-5. Dump them into the MF and the MF has a 1-5, giving the Baseform a 1-25 if it doesn't pay for the base or vehicle. If it does then it gets the normal 1-5 and the MF Forms are 'paying' for it for the privilage of borrowing it (in essense, the main form bought it, the other forms that want to use it also buy it, thus charging you several times for one thing...)

 

I disagree.

 

No the Multiform should not be allowed to buy Vehicles, Bases and Followers. That said there is no reason the Multiform should not be able to access the Team Base or Vehicle just because Cheetah form did not buy the Perk. If Beast Boy bought the Perk that is good enough.

 

OTOH this is a prime reason while some metamorph concepts are better handled by a Animal Tricks MP or VPP and a Shape Shift Power.

 

Hawksmoor

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

I'm glad you mentioned OIHID (though I hope we don't get another OIHID discussion!). If I have a PC that started out at 375 pts (175 in CPs and 200 in disads) that was originally written as OIHID. They share some skills' date=' but the "normal" form is a normal, no powers. Should the PC be rewritten as a multiform? If so, what would be the point breaks. I have never understood how it works either. *G* Which explains why I haven't re-written the PC![/quote']

My general guideline is this:

 

Are the two forms (normal / superpowered) very different in personality, such that each would seem like a different person? (Example: Hulk/Banner) If so, Multiform is probably what you want. If the personalities/memories are pretty much the same (Captain Marvel/Billy Batson) then you probably want OIHID.

 

Of course there are exceptions to every rule, and the one I just mentioned is only my own personal guideline, anyway.

[ghost-angel]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

I disagree.

 

No the Multiform should not be allowed to buy Vehicles, Bases and Followers. That said there is no reason the Multiform should not be able to access the Team Base or Vehicle just because Cheetah form did not buy the Perk. If Beast Boy bought the Perk that is good enough.

 

OTOH this is a prime reason while some metamorph concepts are better handled by a Animal Tricks MP or VPP and a Shape Shift Power.

 

Hawksmoor

Well, I wouldn't blanket state that "Multiforms should not buy bases, vehicles, followers."

 

I can come up with some situations where the Other Form has a vehicle while the Base Form does not. Well, I'm pretty sure I can...

 

Steve's answer that I've seen is:

Technically the MF has to pay for the vehicle too if it wants access to it, but GMs discretion/sense of drama may override this.

 

Such as a Animal Shifter where the BaseForm contributes to a Group Base, the animal form may well be able to walk around in the base. Of course, dramatic sense in that case may be "Animals can't use computers, drive cars or otherwise utilize much of the base beyond Shelter."

[Hawksmoor]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Unless of course the 'animal' in question is just a smart as say Beast Boy. So the monkey form can drop the blast doors and the Cheetah can hitch a ride in the V-Jet. Really, it is all academic. The main point is to prevent the Player from developing Megabase Man/HERO the Rocketeer/and Grok the Wonder Stimpy as Multiforms.

 

That *is* practicing safe gaming hygenie!

Hawksmoor

[ghost-angel]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Unless of course the 'animal' in question is just a smart as say Beast Boy. So the monkey form can drop the blast doors and the Cheetah can hitch a ride in the V-Jet. Really, it is all academic. The main point is to prevent the Player from developing Megabase Man/HERO the Rocketeer/and Grok the Wonder Stimpy as Multiforms.

 

That *is* practicing safe gaming hygenie!

Hawksmoor

This is very true.

 

Multiform (and Duplication) are both powers that really need extra close examination for potential abuse.

[radioKAOS]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

I disagree.

 

No the Multiform should not be allowed to buy Vehicles, Bases and Followers. That said there is no reason the Multiform should not be able to access the Team Base or Vehicle just because Cheetah form did not buy the Perk. If Beast Boy bought the Perk that is good enough.

 

OTOH this is a prime reason while some metamorph concepts are better handled by a Animal Tricks MP or VPP and a Shape Shift Power.

 

Hawksmoor

 

I can see the point for sure, which is why I posted teh question in the first place, but what if there is a scenario where the secondary form should have access to a base that the base form doesn't?

 

Say a Superman type was built with the existing multifom rules, using Clark as the 'base form' - Clark certainly doesn't have access to the 'Fortress of Solitude' - so should he have paid for it?

[Duke Bushido]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Okay, I went to work today, so I'm all rested . Let me see if I can sum all that stream-of-consciousness stuff up a bit clearer:

 

The XP and advancement debates could go on for ever and ever with no clear answer. All the suggestions in this thread are equally valid, and will all depend on what works best for management of your world and your players.

 

Recapped:

 

1) The as-stated 1 to 5 ratio, spent at the whim of the player.

 

2) 1-to-five, but with a limit on how many may be spent on the MF (Steve Long's suggestion, as noted earlier in the thread)

 

3) 1 to 1x#forms, with 1 being awarded to each available form for each one spent by the base form.

 

4) 1 to 1x# forms, limit 1 to 5, to be divided amongst the forms

 

5) Each form must earn his own XP.

 

Again, all valid methods of controlling advancement. Pick what works best for you.

 

My biggest problem with the advancement of MF at the written 1 to 5 is that it the only way immediately recognizeable to keep the form from advancing far ahead of the other characters is to mandate a minimum number of forms, or select one of the above options for spending XP on MF.

 

And of course there is going to be a contingent of players and GMs alike who aren't happy with changing anything from the book. After all, MF gives a _lot_ of potential utility. So be it. No one is suggesting that you differ from the book in anyway.

 

But as I said, I am not completely satisfied with the book's 1 to 5 advancement rate for a single addtional form. And that reason is simple. MF, one addtional form, is essentially OIHID at -5. Want a 10d6 EB, OIHID? Costs 37 points. Want one in MF? Costs 10 points. Big savings.

 

Yes, the standard answer has always been 'but he's not in hero ID, because he no longer has access to the things that he did in his base form. If I can post a few more brain squeezins, it seems to me that OIHID has an obvious corollary, and that would be "_Not_ in Heroic ID." Does the Hulk have all the tech skills of his human counterpart? Of course not; the human half bought those skills (and whatever other abilities) NIHID.

 

I rather like this idea for a single form, actually. It still provides a bit of extra utility (nearly everything on both sheets will warrant a Limitation cost break) for the concept, but does not award what is essentially a list of powers, skills, and characteristics all bought with a -5 Limitation. The 'altered form' can still get some cost savings, as can the base form. Actually, I think I may playtest this some time in the future, just to see how it goes over. But for a single form MF, this has potential.

 

It also keeps intact the concept of MF as representing 'animal boy' or some other concept with a number of altered forms.

------------------------

 

Who pays for bases? :

 

I can see the point for sure' date=' which is why I posted teh question in the first place, but what if there is a scenario where the secondary form should have access to a base that the base form doesn't?[/quote']

 

This is, as I said last night, a really great question. I wish there were a really great answer.

 

For the bulk of MF characters-- those like 'animal boy' or 'Transformatron' and such, I have to stick with the idea that all these forms are essentially that same base character.

 

In the example you posit-- Superman and Clark Kent (See? You don't have read comics to know who Clark Kent is! ), I think you've got a couple of possibilities. As Superman and Clark Kent are intellectually very much the same person, then they both have access. But it'd take a fool-hardy Kent to be seen there as anything other than the Caped Wonder. (or is that Batman? If so, please forgive me; I'm ignorant.) In this case, it comes down to role-playing.

 

Or make the base form pay for it, but allow him the -1/4 Limitation OIHID. Or make the Super version pay with the same Limitation, whichever seems fair.

 

In fact, I may have to play test that as well. If only one form is 'welcome,' then allow the Only in Identity X Limitation. Hmmm.....

 

Now in characters like Hulk or flaming motorcycle guy, I really don't know who should pay, but ultimately the cost to the player should be equal. Yes, it's metagaming, but it's the only way around the 'No fair! He got a -5 Limitation discount on his share!' that I can immediately see.

 

Anyone else?

 

 

Say a Superman type was built with the existing multifom rules, using Clark as the 'base form' - Clark certainly doesn't have access to the 'Fortress of Solitude' - so should he have paid for it?

[radioKAOS]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Yes, the standard answer has always been 'but he's not in hero ID, because he no longer has access to the things that he did in his base form. If I can post a few more brain squeezins, it seems to me that OIHID has an obvious corollary, and that would be "_Not_ in Heroic ID." Does the Hulk have all the tech skills of his human counterpart? Of course not; the human half bought those skills (and whatever other abilities) NIHID.

 

I rather like this idea for a single form, actually. It still provides a bit of extra utility (nearly everything on both sheets will warrant a Limitation cost break) for the concept, but does not award what is essentially a list of powers, skills, and characteristics all bought with a -5 Limitation. The 'altered form' can still get some cost savings, as can the base form. Actually, I think I may playtest this some time in the future, just to see how it goes over. But for a single form MF, this has potential.

 

I think this has much potential for the 'single form' multiformer... I will play around with it wiht my current single form multiform character and see what's what.

[Duke Bushido]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Keep us posted!

 

When I get a little time myself, I'm going to cobble one or two characters using this method and the MF method, and see if it's too hampering to the creation process. While I think it may pose another viable advancement method, I am concerned that it may hamper creation. After all, it effectively caps the player with 438 pts to use for building, after a fashion, two characters. (of course, individual power constructs will round independently, which can increase this 'cap' a bit).

 

Off to work. Y'all have fun.

[radioKAOS]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Well, as expected, it cuts back on the amount of 'available points' to play with, but does have the advantage of being able to buy things for both 'forms' at the same time, reducing some costs in characteristics and skills. One thing that ends up happening is that you want to keep more things in 'both forms' than you might have had otherwise.

 

Sleep comes now.

[Duke Bushido]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Hmmm....

 

I have yet to really play with this, but I was tossing around some brain-builds at work yesterday, and something occured to me:

 

The bulk of HERO's Advantages and Limitations seem to place priority on combat (okay, that didn't occur to me yesterday; we've all known that for years, and I even commented on it earlier in the week).

 

What did occur to me is that this tendency might be useable as a justification for making NIHID a bigger bonus that OIHID, say from a =1/4 to possibly even a -1/2, or even -3/4 if your campaign is detective-light and slug-fest heavy.

 

Obviously the effect this will have on the build depends strongly on the conception of the base character, but I think it can be used to more accurately model the 'single altered form' MF in which the base character is essentially a vehicle for getting the alter to new locales.

 

I have yet to build a character to play test the utility of this, but RadioKAOS, if you already have a character handy, try reworking the base form along these lines and see if it 'works better.'

 

I'm hitting the door to go work on the new house, and will see you folks next week.

[ghost-angel]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

NIHID

just a tiny derail ... everytime I see this all I can think of is batteries and keep going "My character sheet is rechargeable!!"

[Duke Bushido]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

[prestidigitator]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

Different forms of a MF are different characters. What the, "base form," pays for is essentially the ability to have all but one of those characters disappear, for the forms to possibly share some memories, to be able to control all these different characters as one player, etc. I have even (semi-facetiously) shown ways that you can essentially build a Multiform using other Powers like Mind Link and Desolidification.

 

If your teammate buys a Base, you can usually walk into it for free and make use of it (provided he or she is willing, of course). So using the, "1-25," argument you could similarly state that having teammates gives you a, "0-infinity," discount. What exactly are we gaining by this excercise?

 

Someone payed for the Base/Vehicle. It didn't just appear out of heroic zero-point storyland. It is usually reasonable to diallow use of a Base/Vechicle/Follower to any form that didn't pay for it. Limited use (such as one PC might get out of another PC's belongings) might even fit within common sense and not create a lot of game inbalance. What's the big deal? Just think of them as different (Mind Linked or whatever) characters controlled by the same player.

[Duke Bushido]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

You lost me, P---

 

Are we back on the paying for stuff idea?

 

If so, I think the big complaint is that no matter how you think about it, taking five points from a form is only taking one point from the character. I suppose you could require that the form must pay with creation (and therefore Disadvantage) points as opposed to his 'freebie' experience points.

 

To be honest, I don't have a lot of thoughts on this, as in all these years, _none_ of my supers campaigns have ever involved buying a base. Ever. The general tendency is to exchange phone numbers and code words.

[prestidigitator]

Re: I don't quite grok the Multiform rules.

 

You lost me, P---

 

Are we back on the paying for stuff idea?

 

If so, I think the big complaint is that no matter how you think about it, taking five points from a form is only taking one point from the character. I suppose you could require that the form must pay with creation (and therefore Disadvantage) points as opposed to his 'freebie' experience points.

 

To be honest, I don't have a lot of thoughts on this, as in all these years, _none_ of my supers campaigns have ever involved buying a base. Ever. The general tendency is to exchange phone numbers and code words.

The issue was with the, "1/25 cost break," which I think is an illusion, or easily dealt with in any case. I think of it as a non-issue, but many seem to be making a big deal out of it for some reason.