Thoughts on Multiform

[zornwil]

I like Multiform as far as what it basically accomplishes and I think for many genra we can see the need for such a capability.

 

To really serve this discussion well, we should define what capability we really mean - but I'm going to be a little intellectually lazy and just offer up we should discuss that more and for this post leave it at a sloppy "common sense" definition that we "know" that the idea is for characters to be able to switch into either different beings altogether (such as Captain Marvel/Billy Batson or Hulk/Banner, and of course there are non-supers examples) or to retain a single consciousness but radically change forms and/or abilities (such as Animal Man).

 

Anyway, what bothers me with Multiform is its combination of swiss army knife danger with the +5 doubling. It concerns me more than VPP, Duplication, or Followers or the like, because, while also to be watched, they do not grant the character such extreme flexibility. Duplication typically (even regardless of rules) is intuitively understood and applies as more-or-less-the-same character reproduced. Followers have to be maintained, called up, and managed. VPPs can be uber-flexible, surely, but generally speaking we have an origin or SFX that is more or less obeyed and there is a more clear limit within a single character than across many characters run by one player.

 

I'm less bothered when MF is a toggle between different characters - that creates its own soft trade-off, at least in my mind. But when one consciousness can radically change AND gets such flexibility, I fear that the general 1 point per 5 XPs with +5 to double the number just gets too cost effective too fast. I've seen MF players generally voluntarily restrain themselves much more than other players.

 

I wonder if there shouldn't be a better solution, such as enforcing a sort of Compound Multipower instead for single-consciousness characters? I'm not suggesting that balance can be created here by points, and ANY discount scheme coupled with versatility has to be watched, no matter what, as with VPPs. But I am wondering if MF is really the right way to go for single-consciousness "swiss army knife" concepts (such as Animal Man or the like)?

 

Just an informal thread to kick around ideas...

[Diamond Spear]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

I think the rational for costing it that way is that each form is only useful when the character assumes it. In other words the cost is limited because the forms can only be used one at a time and therefore their usefulness is limited. I do agree that Multiform is a power that needs close GM supervision to avoid potential abuses, but no more so than power frameworks do. After all it’s pretty easy to tell when a player crosses the line from concept to munchkin.

[zornwil]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

I think the rational for costing it that way is that each form is only useful when the character assumes it. In other words the cost is limited because the forms can only be used one at a time and therefore their usefulness is limited. I do agree that Multiform is a power that needs close GM supervision to avoid potential abuses' date=' but no more so than power frameworks do. After all it’s pretty easy to tell when a player crosses the line from concept to munchkin.[/quote']

I don't think it's that easy to tell, generally, re that line - at least not with well-intended players who happen to have 25 years of experience and efficiency knowledge with building characters. Of course I might be reacting much more to superhero genre issues than general issues, as I think about it - to my (limited) knowledge the superhero genre is much more loaded with completely reasonable-sounding concepts that nonetheless can, depending upon implementation, be too much in an RPG.

 

What I have seen in a high-powered campaign is that the 2 characters who are multiform types get incredibly efficient incredibly fast, almost no matter how the players attempt to restrain those builds. Once you are in the 600 point range certain discount schemas, especially VPP and Multiform combos, become incredibly effective against characters without those schemas. Of course, this can be said about a lot of things, but I am starting to suspect, as this thread indicates, that the Multiform capability scales up too dramatically compared to others.

[tesuji]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

I would consider as a starting point a very simple concept...

 

Multiform as a Multipower.

 

pay a "pool cost" equal to the points of each form.

Charge 10% of that cost for each form as a "slot"

 

Example elemental man has 4 elemental forms at 250 each

 

Cost for elemental man is 250 + 4 slots of 25 each = or 350.

 

phase by phase as free action he can switch between his brick (earth), his blaster (fire), his stealth guy (wind) and his ...errr... water guy.

 

yes he is a 250 pt character at any given time, in a 350 game but assuming "moderately efficient" design... he is the right 250 pt character for each specific challenge.

 

consider the effectiveness of an Abel-Baker Charlie multiform as an example...

Abel is a brick neanderthal, baker is a batman type skills guy (the core form, martial arts and skills), and charlie is the mentalist guy. thats a pretty potent "dial-a-power-to-fit" combo yet as multiform currently works all three could be 350 in a 350 game, tho perhaps with a normal guy form to pay for the multiform.

 

if "total pool plus 10% per slot" works for many different powers and attributes as "fair accounting for multipowers" why doesn't it work for multiforms?

[zornwil]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

I would consider as a starting point a very simple concept...

 

Multiform as a Multipower.

 

pay a "pool cost" equal to the points of each form.

Charge 10% of that cost for each form as a "slot"

 

Example elemental man has 4 elemental forms at 250 each

 

Cost for elemental man is 250 + 4 slots of 25 each = or 350.

 

phase by phase as free action he can switch between his brick (earth), his blaster (fire), his stealth guy (wind) and his ...errr... water guy.

 

yes he is a 250 pt character at any given time, in a 350 game but assuming "moderately efficient" design... he is the right 250 pt character for each specific challenge.

 

consider the effectiveness of an Abel-Baker Charlie multiform as an example...

Abel is a brick neanderthal, baker is a batman type skills guy (the core form, martial arts and skills), and charlie is the mentalist guy. thats a pretty potent "dial-a-power-to-fit" combo yet as multiform currently works all three could be 350 in a 350 game, tho perhaps with a normal guy form to pay for the multiform.

 

if "total pool plus 10% per slot" works for many different powers and attributes as "fair accounting for multipowers" why doesn't it work for multiforms?

I'll have to think about that, that sounds like a real possibility, might be elegant enough. As you say and as I have witnessed, the "right thing for the right occasion" is extremely effective and I don't think those types of PCs need as much power (with points - Real or Active - being the roughest approximation we have for power level). Thanks.

[Diamond Spear]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

I would consider as a starting point a very simple concept...

 

Multiform as a Multipower.

 

pay a "pool cost" equal to the points of each form.

Charge 10% of that cost for each form as a "slot"

 

Example elemental man has 4 elemental forms at 250 each

 

Cost for elemental man is 250 + 4 slots of 25 each = or 350.

 

phase by phase as free action he can switch between his brick (earth), his blaster (fire), his stealth guy (wind) and his ...errr... water guy.

 

yes he is a 250 pt character at any given time, in a 350 game but assuming "moderately efficient" design... he is the right 250 pt character for each specific challenge.

 

consider the effectiveness of an Abel-Baker Charlie multiform as an example...

Abel is a brick neanderthal, baker is a batman type skills guy (the core form, martial arts and skills), and charlie is the mentalist guy. thats a pretty potent "dial-a-power-to-fit" combo yet as multiform currently works all three could be 350 in a 350 game, tho perhaps with a normal guy form to pay for the multiform.

 

if "total pool plus 10% per slot" works for many different powers and attributes as "fair accounting for multipowers" why doesn't it work for multiforms?

 

Fantastic idea!

[zornwil]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

I can't rep him yet, out for the day.

[Diamond Spear]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

I can't rep him yet' date=' out for the day.[/quote']

 

If it makes you feel better I already repped him for it.

[Cancer]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

I play a Multiform character, and from experience I can assure you he's not one who needs to be hamstrungnerfed restricted. There are certain limitations to the power that very quickly rein in the problems you allude to, and certain other limitations which make for rather less limitation than their nominal value. A careful re-examination of the values of the limitations (and advantages) as they apply to Multiform may achieve the balance you're looking for better than some other approach. This seems like an obvious extension of the "if it doesn't restrict you it isn't worth anything" principle of limitations. If changing forms is a free action every phase, you ought to get no discount (or, at most, a Lockout discount) for the powers in any of the alternate forms since you can have any of them whenever you want at will. It turns it into a multipower, not a multiform.

 

Making form-changes should be expensive, and perhaps difficult. Extra Time (defined by the speed of the base form) for a form change goes a long way toward equalizing the power. Charges does the same (you can only enter a given form once a day, e.g.).

 

Stacking discount combos (the Multiform with a VPP) probably should be forbidden; or, perhaps, the discounts don't stack, rather the base form pays full price for the VPP with at most a minor limitation to bring down the Real Cost, not 1/5 of the cost of the VPP in the alternate form.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

I can't rep him yet' date=' out for the day.[/quote']

 

I've repped him too recently, apparently.

[TaxiMan]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

At character creation, it's possible to "limit" a MF character by asking if Limitations and Disadvantages are really limiting. If the character has a way around these, reduce it's value.

 

For instance, if Dr. Banner has Psych Lim: Won't Kill and Hulk doesn't, the player isn't as limited as is usually assumed. Got a world-ending threat that really, really needs to be killed? Rage up and let Hulk take care of it!

 

Not worth the "regular" value. So discount it.

 

Similarly, if one form has a fire form with "Not in water" on the powers and has another water form with "Not in fire / heat" - they might be -0 Limitations.

 

For the Powers side, reduced values for Limitations will reign in some abuse. For Disadvantages, remind the player that you don't have to rack up enough to get the max.

 

In a 250 + 100 point game, the MF player might be running 275-300 point characters...

[zornwil]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

At character creation, it's possible to "limit" a MF character by asking if Limitations and Disadvantages are really limiting. If the character has a way around these, reduce it's value.

 

For instance, if Dr. Banner has Psych Lim: Won't Kill and Hulk doesn't, the player isn't as limited as is usually assumed. Got a world-ending threat that really, really needs to be killed? Rage up and let Hulk take care of it!

 

Not worth the "regular" value. So discount it.

 

Similarly, if one form has a fire form with "Not in water" on the powers and has another water form with "Not in fire / heat" - they might be -0 Limitations.

 

For the Powers side, reduced values for Limitations will reign in some abuse. For Disadvantages, remind the player that you don't have to rack up enough to get the max.

 

In a 250 + 100 point game, the MF player might be running 275-300 point characters...

It's a good point, thanks, but I would say I don't think that's necessarily going to have much impact. I haven't seen MF characters loaded down with lims much at all or Disads, except those that do apply to all their forms. From where I see it, the over-effectiveness is with the core construct itself, at higher point values (I think in the 350 range it's probably not so bad but I think as you scale up to 400-600 it starts to rapidly show issues as, at least IME, MF-type characters, especially if coupled with other frameworks, become much more effective even without players trying at all to be so.

[tesuji]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

One point to keep in mind, one of the "benefits" of having multiple options is exactly the ability to choose what to use at a given moment.

 

Again think multiform.. i can have a no range HKA and a ranged blast RKA and an EB and an NND and choose whichever seems best for a given moment.

 

So nerfing that notion is perhaps not the way to go.

 

Instead, i would rather the basic MF power take those into account and let you lower the cost if you take restrictions.

 

As for banner and his psych disad, the CHARACTER controls the power... so banners "wont kill" would limit his choices to use the power, making him at the very loeast do the ego rolls to voluntarily hulk up.

 

As i have thought about it some more, my basic idea would be as originally described:

 

There becomes a metacharacter... which exists only on paper to do the accounting, he has one ability... multiform. he is merely an accounting phantasm not a real thingy.

 

Pay a Pool Cost for the total Cp any single character can have.

Pay a form cost equal to 10% of the forms total points. So cheap little rat form is dirt cheap while t-rex form is expensive.

Changing forms is a free action by default...

 

To the form costs apply any lims which interfere or hinder transformation.

Extra time, requires ego roll, only in lab, requires concentration etc at whatever value they apply to "starting constant power".

 

like a VPP nothing affects the pool cost.

 

as for XP, there are two ways to spend XP...

 

one XP can be spent on the meta-character to improve the pool size and thus allow increases in individual characters. That remains 1-for-1 so there is no imbalance.

 

XP can also be spent to increase form cost allowing more points for them so little rat form becomes "not so little rat" form by increasing his slot, but again limited to the maximum of the pool.

 

Do note however, you do bring back into the game the "iterative math" angle where you need to figure out or trial and error the value you can have at a given number of forms and points. that never scared me but it was iirc one of the reasons for removing the cap on multiform anyway.

 

still pondering...

[OddHat]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

I've often said that Multiform is the single Power easiest to unintentionally abuse.

 

Sure, you can abuse all sorts of things. Summon, Duplication, Vehicles, Followers, and any gadget with the 5 point doubling adder in particular are easy to break ime. VPPs don't worry me all that much, so long as concept is enforced, but I can see why they bug some folks. MPs can get weird.

 

All of the above require, imo, more conscious effort to abuse than Multiform.

 

With Multiform, the player might start out with a fairly simple "OK, I want to be a skilled detective and brawler who turns into a crazed giant wolf". Perfectly appropriate use of Multiform. Then he might decide "You know, for 5 points more, I can have a halfway between Wolf and Human form" and stop there. Great, concept is honored, and the player has a flexible, powerful character.

 

Maybe too powerful from the POV of other players. After all, Detective Wolf now has a "normal" detective with about 150+ points sunk into skills and perks, a combat monster form that's 300+ points of pure destruction (50 points being enhanced senses and shared knowledge from the Human form), and a middle form that retains many of the skills of the Human form, some of the combat power of the Wolf form, and adds about 50+ points of new extras. He is for all practical purposes a 500 point character in a 350 point campaign.

 

Is that completely unreasonable? Maybe not, if the other characters are also running around with OnlyInHeroID, Power Armor, Multipowers. and other limits that allow them to stretch their points. As long as the GM is paying attention, it may be that Detective Wolf isn't really working on more points than the rest of the gang.

 

Now another Player comes in with a fun idea for a character. The Pantheon, a group of the Earth's Seven Mightiest Heroes, has been destroyed. This character was the sidekick of one of those heroes. Through the technology of Amalgo the Super Android, an android that could simulate the powers of all seven members of the Pantheon, the sidekick has gained the power to change physically into any one of the seven Great Heroes. He also has his normal form, a young acrobat and detective.

 

Each of the Pantheon has about 200 points of powers not shared by the base form or any other member of the pantheon. The character, depending on how you look at it, actually has somewhere between 1600-2800 points to play with in a 350 point game.

 

In no way will that be fair to the other players, unless all the characters are similarly min-maxed.

 

We can always just say "No", and I do, but I don't feel I have to look at most builds nearly as carefully as I need to look at multiform.

[SuperKlaus]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

It helps me some just to make Multiform constructs abide very closely to campaign Active Point caps. Sure it only takes a 70 pt Multi to create a 350 pt alternate self, but in my 350 pt game with 50-60 AP caps a would-be Multimunchkin finds himself less able to create a ton of effective "army knife blades." After all each form's probably blowing 100 points or so just to maintain decent movement, attack and defense.

[zornwil]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

To SuperKlaus, Bear in mind that with +5 to double forms, that 100 points per form (which is divided by 5 so it's 20 points) scales up effectively really really fast.

 

I'm looking at Tesuji's proposal with some optimism. In fact, I am wondering if Tesuji's proposal wouldn't even be superior to the book option for general play.

 

Here's a central philosophical issue re MF - is MF really different characters/entities or just different power sets of a single character/entity? If it's the former, remaining consistent with the Duplication, Followers, Summon, and so on approaches makes sense. If it's the latter, it makes more sense to move towards a power pool concept, a framework concept, just as is normally employed for powers.

 

I think more and more that MF is the latter, dressed up, so to speak, as the former and thus causing confusion.

 

Cancer, I missed your post earlier, somehow, sorry. I am curious what power level you are playing at. I am going to repeat myself here, but I think the problem with MF today is not so much at the 350 mark (give or take and assuming a "reasonable" build), but more visible at higher point values, and especially if we assume a character takes on a significant number of forms (once we start moving at the 4+ mark, roughly). Bear in mind that flexibility that comes with the doubling of forms and high points totals in EACH form. But I like your points on VPPs and such - and I think it hearkens directly back to my point here in that the VPP that might come into play across forms is often really a single VPP that is "reused" to represent the varying tricks of forms that are flexible in and of themselves ("big cats form," "flying animals form," for example), and again comes back much more to being sets of powers rather than actual sets of characters.

 

Another thing I like about Tesuji's construct is it better balances against the whole "base form" issue. I am sympathetic to 5th's change away from dictating that the base form must be the most expensive one - but that opened a huge potential issue for GMs and players to wrestle with where base forms might be quite cheap, providing massive discounting for the other forms. Tesuji's issue more properly addresses it by maintaining a cap/pool which must be paid for fully, but not forcing (as prior editions did) any base form construct that means that alternate forms are embedded within the most expensive one. This allows for costs changes across forms more easily and more elegantly.

 

Looking at pricing differences, I think this works well, too, but I know others will disagree. Let's take a 350 point character with 9 total forms. Let's assume for simplicity all forms are 350. The cost to the player in 5th is 350 total for a base form of 350 which includes 65 points for the 8 forms (50 points for having a form of 250, then +15 to double that 3 times, from 1 to 2 to 4 to 8), meaning that the base form is really 285. In Tesuji's method, we'd have the same character requiring a 350 point pool with 8 slots at 35 points each and 1 at 28 - a total of 658. It's a lot more, but for 9 forms I think that's pretty darn reasonable as that is a lot, and such a character has quite a versatile thing going on compared to his counterparts. Let's go with the more reasonable 3-formed version, a base form with 2 other forms. In 5th that's (still with the same assumptions) 350 points with 55 points dedicated to 2 other forms, meaning the base form is at 295. Tesuji's fashion puts that as 2 forms at 350 for 35 point each and 1 at 295 for 29 points, with the control cost of 350; that's 449, which is basically 100 points more. Still a substantially higher investment.

 

To me, these cost differences are fine. The notion that each form gets to automatically have the same maximum CPs with the per-+5 doubling means that with each form being something quite different there's an extreme scaling up in effectiveness. This being said, I recognize there are 2 major issues. The first is pure and simple the increased cost which is a fact by itself, no matter what, and it is what it is. But that said, the second issue is that MF does NOT discourage having completely different forms with extreme versatility, so you LOSE a lot of efficiency in Tesuji's method IF your forms have lots of similarities among them - and the more similar, the more you "lose" compared to 5th edition's method, where this shines and the lower cost of 5th is MUCH more justified the less variable the forms. But this can be countered, I argue, quite easily by, in Tesuji's method, ensuring that if you have very similar forms you simply make them a single slot and put in a Multipower or VPP to reflect the less critical differences among those very similar forms. Another advantage, I counter, is that while Tesuji's method is more expensive, each form does not have to be close to the CP max in order for the character to be efficient, BECAUSE each form is geared to be appropriate "at the moment," therefore already more effective by definition, and aside from Disads and other roleplay elements, a character will pick his best slots. And remember, if he can't, then you can apply Limitations to slots to reflect this, bringing the price down appropriately. But assuming the character can pick and choose, he's already getting some effiicency by soft definition, and with fewer CPs he can concentrate each form for its specialty. IN FACT, think that Tesuji's method is cost-constructed such that it FORCES players to make much more specific choices on the forms, which in turn will assure that forms are distinct, specific, and decreases the likelihood of stepping on too many other players' schticks just given that one cannot simply double the number of forms for a mere 5 points.

 

I know that I myself argued in the past that conceptually each form should be consistent in execution with Duplication and Followers and so on, but I think I was wrong having seen it in play, and the incorrectness is exactly related to the flexibility issue. Yes, Duplicates can have different powers and so on, but remember there is additional costing and it gets expensive for them. And while the doubling means that hordes of Duplicates are definitely over-efficient, in reality it has its own practical limitation in that GMs and players simply will choke (most of the time, and certainly if each is taking independent, individual actions) on any high number of dups, especially once we start moving beyond around 4. Yes, Followers bring quick and easy flexibility, no question, but Follower actually have to be there, are not controlled by the PC, and so have lots of built-in challenges. Summoned characters are not by default controlled, either. And with Followers and Summon, I'd add that there's a built in roleplay element that, simply put, players and social conventions simply don't desire highlighting these at the expense of one's own PC - creating another soft balance factor. Multiform lacks all of these built-in inhibitors, and as I mentioned in this post from another viewpoint, and in my opinion in its most frequent application, MF really is about separate power sets for what is really, in effect, a single character - so coming back to my point about how it probably is really best executed. Which Tesuji's method does basically approach in this spirit.

[Cancer]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

Well, I've only played at the 350-to-400 point level in any Champions-type game, let alone with the Multiform, so I have no direct experience at the higher power level. The character is a human who takes on different power forms depending on which power pill he takes, so it is clearly the same character with different power/skill/limitation sets. Because changing forms is "expensive" the hyperversatility you are concerned about isn't an issue.

 

On the other hand, we don't play the campaign much, so we haven't seen the effects of the 1-to-5 cost ratio amplifying the multiforms faster than the other characters. (I can see that in principle that issue will exist ... I just doubt that in our case it will actually arise, because our group timeshares between too many new shiny campaigns.) Applying Active Point caps within each individual form is another step toward holding a growing MF character in step with his cohorts.

 

Tesuji's suggestion is very interesting, and I'll have to spend some time messing with it, but unfortunately that's not something I am going to have the time to do anytime soon.

 

An in-game response is that Multiform characters stand much more to lose against Dispel and Suppress attacks. If the MF is successfully Dispelled, then the form's entire power suite goes away, and none of the alternate forms are available. Unless the base form is something special (which is unlikely, at least for combat effects), the character is likely to be made almost completely helpless -- a far greater loss than any other sort of character. That kind of threat is something the player should be confronted with to "encourage" him to give some thought to survivability in the base form.

[zornwil]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

Good point re Power Adjustments, thanks. I have locked MFers into their form before via such tactics (usually affecting both Shape Shift and Multiform, all SFX related to bodily rearrangement), but hadn't thought about it recently.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

Looking at pricing differences' date=' I think this works well, too, but I know others will disagree. Let's take a 350 point character with 9 total forms. Let's assume for simplicity all forms are 350. The cost to the player in 5th is 350 total for a base form of 350 which includes 65 points for the 8 forms (50 points for having a form of 250, then +15 to double that 3 times, from 1 to 2 to 4 to 8), meaning that the base form is really 285. In Tesuji's method, we'd have the same character requiring a 350 point pool with 8 slots at 35 points each and 1 at 28 - a total of 658. It's a lot more, but for 9 forms I think that's pretty darn reasonable as that is a lot, and such a character has quite a versatile thing going on compared to his counterparts. Let's go with the more reasonable 3-formed version, a base form with 2 other forms. In 5th that's (still with the same assumptions) 350 points with 55 points dedicated to 2 other forms, meaning the base form is at 295. Tesuji's fashion puts that as 2 forms at 350 for 35 point each and 1 at 295 for 29 points, with the control cost of 350; that's 449, which is basically 100 points more. Still a substantially higher investment.[/quote']

I may be missing something here, but it seems to me you're using 250-point forms when you use the book method, and 350-point forms when you use tesuji's method, above. It shouldn't come as any surprise that the 350-point forms are more expensive. In the first example (9 forms), the cost should be 285 for the pool, 25 for each of eight forms, and 28 for the base form, for a total of 513. In the second example, the cost would be 295+25+25+29 = 374.

 

Remember also that each form must take disadvantages for all the points over the base points, and some advantages won't apply (or have a reduced value) due to the ease in changing forms. And when the base form spends XP to increase the points in a form, new disads will have to be added to that form.

[Lamrok]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

As a player in Zornwil's game, here's what I see happening - (Oddhat actually touched on this in his initial reply.) In the beginning, characters had lots of powers, plus some skills and perks. Let's say 90% of points spent on powers, 10% spent on skills and perks. As time has passed, those proportions have probably hit 70/30 or 60/40, partly as a result of Zornwil's generously quirky experience awards of various knowledge skills and perks related to adventures.

 

Characters with Multiform tend to have those non-combat skills and perks built on a base form that is very effective out of combat. When combat starts, they can use a multiform and switch to another combat oriented form based on their total points - including points which had originally been allocated for solely background purposes. Then they can choose from a fairly wide selection of forms depending on the situation - eventually you hit a threshold where new forms are essentially free. As the game progresses, the ease of +5 to double forms is multiplied by the steadily increasing proportion of non-combat points and this produces the spike in efficiency efficiency Zornwil mentioned.

 

I think that the essential answer to the problem is that multiforms shouldn't ordinarily allow conversion between powers and skills/perks unless there is a compelling reason for it. Knowing that you have to spend an action to switch to a form that has "architect 50-" isn't much of a hindrance, especially if your number of forms is essentially unlimited. You wind up having your entire character functioning as a VPP, only there are no limitations about what sorts of stuff can be put in that VPP. Every extra experience point awarded to you from the GM goes into this pool.

 

I personally think that multiform should be done away with, and, taking Tetsuji's construct one step farther, that the definition of of multi-power should be massaged to make it cover the territory - allowing characters to make sweeping changes to powers without swapping skills and perks out. Losing access to skills and perks would be a limitation on a slot, rather than default behavior of the power. Unlimited form changes should be covered by VPPs.

[Checkmate]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

Here's a central philosophical issue re MF - is MF really different characters/entities or just different power sets of a single character/entity? If it's the former' date=' remaining consistent with the Duplication, Followers, Summon, and so on approaches makes sense. If it's the latter, it makes more sense to move towards a power pool concept, a framework concept, just as is normally employed for powers.[/quote']

While I like Tesuji's construct, I typically only allow Multiform if the character's mind changes.

 

In your first post, you give Captain Marvel/Billy Batson as an example of Multiform; As a GM that would be a OIHID since Captain Marvel keeps Billy's mind (skills, memories, likes, dislikes etc.). The original Hulk would be multiform (loses Banner's intellignece and science skills, has different motivations etc.). So in my mind I see the philosophical issue of MF as the former. I do see your point however, and do agree that the typical use of the MF power is the latter and Tesuji's construct is perfect for this.

[zornwil]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

I may be missing something here, but it seems to me you're using 250-point forms when you use the book method, and 350-point forms when you use tesuji's method, above. It shouldn't come as any surprise that the 350-point forms are more expensive. In the first example (9 forms), the cost should be 285 for the pool, 25 for each of eight forms, and 28 for the base form, for a total of 513. In the second example, the cost would be 295+25+25+29 = 374.

 

Remember also that each form must take disadvantages for all the points over the base points, and some advantages won't apply (or have a reduced value) due to the ease in changing forms. And when the base form spends XP to increase the points in a form, new disads will have to be added to that form.

 

I started out with 250 as the example and changed it mid-writing to 350 and apparently missed something during the change, that caused the mistake. Thanks.

[zornwil]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

While I like Tesuji's construct, I typically only allow Multiform if the character's mind changes.

 

In your first post, you give Captain Marvel/Billy Batson as an example of Multiform; As a GM that would be a OIHID since Captain Marvel keeps Billy's mind (skills, memories, likes, dislikes etc.). The original Hulk would be multiform (loses Banner's intellignece and science skills, has different motivations etc.). So in my mind I see the philosophical issue of MF as the former. I do see your point however, and do agree that the typical use of the MF power is the latter and Tesuji's construct is perfect for this.

Yeah, you got the intent, as to Capt. Marvel/Billy, I find that one a bit more intrigueing as they are different consciousnesses but share memories - good point, I wasn't thinking of that although it is a powerful aspect.

[zornwil]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

As a player in Zornwil's game, here's what I see happening - (Oddhat actually touched on this in his initial reply.) In the beginning, characters had lots of powers, plus some skills and perks. Let's say 90% of points spent on powers, 10% spent on skills and perks. As time has passed, those proportions have probably hit 70/30 or 60/40, partly as a result of Zornwil's generously quirky experience awards of various knowledge skills and perks related to adventures.

 

Characters with Multiform tend to have those non-combat skills and perks built on a base form that is very effective out of combat. When combat starts, they can use a multiform and switch to another combat oriented form based on their total points - including points which had originally been allocated for solely background purposes. Then they can choose from a fairly wide selection of forms depending on the situation - eventually you hit a threshold where new forms are essentially free. As the game progresses, the ease of +5 to double forms is multiplied by the steadily increasing proportion of non-combat points and this produces the spike in efficiency efficiency Zornwil mentioned.

 

I think that the essential answer to the problem is that multiforms shouldn't ordinarily allow conversion between powers and skills/perks unless there is a compelling reason for it. Knowing that you have to spend an action to switch to a form that has "architect 50-" isn't much of a hindrance, especially if your number of forms is essentially unlimited. You wind up having your entire character functioning as a VPP, only there are no limitations about what sorts of stuff can be put in that VPP. Every extra experience point awarded to you from the GM goes into this pool.

 

I personally think that multiform should be done away with, and, taking Tetsuji's construct one step farther, that the definition of of multi-power should be massaged to make it cover the territory - allowing characters to make sweeping changes to powers without swapping skills and perks out. Losing access to skills and perks would be a limitation on a slot, rather than default behavior of the power. Unlimited form changes should be covered by VPPs.

Perhaps MF would remain (whether it is altered or not) to address separate consciousnesses. Given the challenges of that (if played properly), I think despite its seemingly minor nature as it's not so points-quantifiable, it's really a major kink that I think will tend to balance out many issues.

 

But I do have a fundamental agreement of a rework involving transitioning MF to be more in line with the power pool concepts such as MP and VPP. What I like about Tesuji's approach is that while it doesn't directly do that, it's more consistent (and scales similarly) with those concepts.

[OddHat]

Re: Thoughts on Multiform

 

Perhaps MF would remain (whether it is altered or not) to address separate consciousnesses. Given the challenges of that (if played properly), I think despite its seemingly minor nature as it's not so points-quantifiable, it's really a major kink that I think will tend to balance out many issues.

 

But I do have a fundamental agreement of a rework involving transitioning MF to be more in line with the power pool concepts such as MP and VPP. What I like about Tesuji's approach is that while it doesn't directly do that, it's more consistent (and scales similarly) with those concepts.

 

Actually, it's pretty easy to simulate Multiform with Shapeshift plus a Multipower or VPP. You handle stat losses and new disads compared to the base form through side effects, and disadvantages nulled by the change can usually just be moved down one step in frequency. Unfortunately, it's not as clean a build as Multiform.