Multiform Question

[Vestnik]

Me no understand complicated Hero System. Bighead Steve Long hurt Vestnik's brain.

 

I'm writing up a character with Multiform and there's something I don't understand. Now, the power in question is intended to be used only as a last resort, as it's a Hulk-type transformation, the second form of which has a completely, and not entirely pleasant, personality. But the Personality Reversion Limitation given in Fifth Edition has a maximum of starting to make personality loss rolls after 1 turn (-2). How much would it be to have the personality loss always happen?

 

Also, maybe I'm not reading things right, but it seems to me that if I have a 350-point character who buys multiform (another 350-point character), that costs 70 points. So now I basically have one 350-point character and one 280-point character (not counting the MP) (which can't be used at the same time obviously). For +5 points, I have two 350-point characters and one 275-point character (which I would never in fact actually have to use in play). This sounds a little unbalanced to me -- or am I not getting something?

 

Thanks!!

 

EDIT: Also, how does one do Psychological Limitations for a Multiform with Personality Loss? One just lets the "base form" psych lims operate until the loss occurs, and then use a separate set for the second form?

[ghost-angel]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Personality Loss is intended for a more permanent solution: As in "I've been shapeshift as a bird for so long I literally forget what it's like to be human, even after I change back to human." Not "I'm a different Personality in my alternate form." For that simply define the alternate form as having a different Personality (which is a good use of Multiform IMO).

 

Multiform needs to be monitored by the GM. It's not that unbalanced I don't think - the ability to have one form shift into different forms needs to cost something for at least one of the forms, no way around it.

 

The Psych Lims are 'active' whenever the form they are a Disad for is the current 'active' form.

[Vestnik]

Re: Multiform Question

 

 

Multiform needs to be monitored by the GM. It's not that unbalanced I don't think - the ability to have one form shift into different forms needs to cost something for at least one of the forms, no way around it.

 

It seemed problematic to me coming from the other direction -- if either form can be the base form, you could, say:

 

Build one form as a 350-point character, Super Guy.

 

Build the second form as a 290-point character plus a Multiform to Super Guy. This is Slightly Less Super Guy.

 

If Super Guy is used in play as the main form, he now has the ability to Multiform to Slightly Less Super Guy for an effective cost in points of zero.

 

I hope I am doing something wrong, because this seems really iffy to me.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Multiform Question

 

It seemed problematic to me coming from the other direction -- if either form can be the base form, you could, say:

 

Build one form as a 350-point character, Super Guy.

 

Build the second form as a 290-point character plus a Multiform to Super Guy. This is Slightly Less Super Guy.

 

If Super Guy is used in play as the main form, he now has the ability to Multiform to Slightly Less Super Guy for an effective cost in points of zero.

 

I hope I am doing something wrong, because this seems really iffy to me.

 

Theoretically - sure you could spend all your time in one form or the other.

 

It's up to the GM and the Players to prevent abuse. The System is not your "bad roleplaying nanny"

[Silbeg]

Re: Multiform Question

 

EDIT: Also, how does one do Psychological Limitations for a Multiform with Personality Loss? One just lets the "base form" psych lims operate until the loss occurs, and then use a separate set for the second form?

As ghost-arrow said, the Personality Loss is only indicates that the form "forgets" that it is human, etc.

 

In this case, you probably don't need the Limitation. All you would do is set up the Psych Lims for the "Hulk" form (as well as Enrages, etc) in such a way to show that he is violent beast, whatever. Then, whenever he is in that form, he has the Psych Lims, etc., of that form. He no longer has the Disadvantages from the base form.

 

The thing to remember is that the Multiforms are distinct characters. They need have nothing in common.

[TaxiMan]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Yes, Multiform can easily be unbalanced. Take any five 350pt superheros, add in a sixth form that pays for the multiform and Viola! You get to play any of those guys!

 

Hopefully the GM stops that. Also, the Disadvantages of a character might not be worth as much if it's easy to switch to another character that has different Disadvantages. That can put the squeeze on abusing Multiform a little.

[Vestnik]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Yes, Multiform can easily be unbalanced. Take any five 350pt superheros, add in a sixth form that pays for the multiform and Viola! You get to play any of those guys!

 

Hopefully the GM stops that. Also, the Disadvantages of a character might not be worth as much if it's easy to switch to another character that has different Disadvantages. That can put the squeeze on abusing Multiform a little.

 

Why not just require all forms to pay for Multiform?

[TaxiMan]

Re: Multiform Question

 

It's not my game system - have to talk to Steve about that, but you won't get far. We're free to do so in our individual games.

[GAZZA]

Re: Multiform Question

 

In 4th ed this wouldn't have worked (and not because of the new +5 = 2x forms, either). No forms could have had a cost greater than the base form after subtracting the cost of the Multiform.

 

So you'd be limited to two 291 point forms in 4th rules. Grandfathering in this rule for 5th edition limits abuse a bit (especially if you also disallow power frameworks for any form other than the base form).

[ghost-angel]

Re: Multiform Question

 

In 4th ed this wouldn't have worked (and not because of the new +5 = 2x forms' date=' either). No forms could have had a cost greater than the base form [b']after[/b] subtracting the cost of the Multiform.

 

So you'd be limited to two 291 point forms in 4th rules. Grandfathering in this rule for 5th edition limits abuse a bit (especially if you also disallow power frameworks for any form other than the base form).

 

Personally I found that over restrictive to the point of making Multiform useless. And I'm glad that restriction was removed and the obligation placed on the GM and Players to prevent abuse.

 

Given a Heroic Game, a mage's "Polymorph" spell would be unusable.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Personally I found that over restrictive to the point of making Multiform useless. And I'm glad that restriction was removed and the obligation placed on the GM and Players to prevent abuse.

 

Given a Heroic Game, a mage's "Polymorph" spell would be unusable.

 

BINGO. We seem to get these "Multiform is broken" threads every now and then, and they all start off discussing forms that are 1,000 points and/or having a 350 point form for every occasion. All this proves is that Multiform can be abused.

 

So can Energy Blast. Drop 100 points on Energy Blast and watch the balance in most games crumble. If I tack an extra 25 PD and 25 ED onto my character, that throws the balance out of whack pretty quickly too. That's without getting into any really complex powers.

 

But Multiform is necessary for some concepts in some genres. The Mage with a Polymorph spell is a fantastic example of this. The present structure allows such a spell to be functional. The cost of Hero's flexibility is risk of abuse. Are there any games out there that have no potential for abuse, and are still playable?

[Rapier]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Are there any games out there that have no potential for abuse' date=' and are still playable?[/quote']

 

 

Checkers?

[Bloodstone]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Checkers is almost as broken as Tic-Tac-Toe!

 

Solitaire on the other hand...

[Reality Czech]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Pong. I'm tired of seeing all the abuse and exploiting of loopholes in Pong.

[tesuji]

Re: Multiform Question

 

 

BINGO. We seem to get these "Multiform is broken" threads every now and then, and they all start off discussing forms that are 1,000 points and/or having a 350 point form for every occasion. All this proves is that Multiform can be abused.

Indeed. However, i have some sympathies for this concern. The hero system's underlying premise is that cost is comparable to effectiveness... thats what the points are for. If a power bought "normally" at regular cost produces an abusive result withiin common campaign limitations, then isn't it valid to question whether the cost is appropriately arrived at?

 

At 75 cp, in a 350 supers game, I can have within typical campaign limitations a 75 ap power easily enough.... and many 75 ap powers wont break the bank. However, its fairly easy to look at "two 350 multiforms and a 275 pt lesser form" as being "better than" one 350 pt form.

 

the normal logci of "cost reflects effectiveness" implies there should be some trade off... to gain the efficacy of two 350 pt forms should cost more than the cost of having one 350 pt form... but its not there.

 

The hero system recognizes that having two 60 pt attacks, say a 12d6 eb abd a 4d6 rka, should cost more than having a single 60 pt attack, and gives us a multipower slot cost to make it happen, so it seems INCONSISTENT to at the same time a few pages down say that having two different 350 pt characters is going to cost the same, or less, than having one.

 

the current multiform power costing structure makes getting "alternartive 350 pt characters" possible in a 350 pt game for no extra cost if your Gm follows the rules and uses the costs. At the same time, the rules make you pay extra for having alternative 60 ap attacks, or alternate 60 ap defenses or whatever.

 

it seems inconsistent and no real argument is put forth as to why the exception is needed.

 

 

So can Energy Blast. Drop 100 points on Energy Blast and watch the balance in most games crumble. If I tack an extra 25 PD and 25 ED onto my character, that throws the balance out of whack pretty quickly too. That's without getting into any really complex powers.

thats an example, likely, of violating campaign norms. its not an example of having cost not reflect effectiveness within campaign norms.

 

By the same dismissal, i could argue that EB was correct at 1 ap per d6 of damage, based on the argument that its not the system thats supposed to keep it in check and the Gm is free to dismiss any Eb he finds abusive.

 

now the argument against this would be that 1 ap per d6 is clearly out of whack when compared to 15 ap per d6 rka. A system where cost is tied to effectiveness should not have such a difference.

 

similarly, having two 350 pt forms and one 275 pt form is "clearly out of whack" when compared to having a single 350 pt form and similarly, a system where cost is tied to effectiveness should not have such a difference.

 

At least thats the argument as i understand it and it has IMO merit, if one buys into the entire underlying premise.... that the points, the costs are tied to, related to, derived from effectiveness.

 

if you toss that assumption out and simply rely on the GM to enforce balance, then things like multiform become not a problem.

 

 

But Multiform is necessary for some concepts in some genres.

i dont think anyone is arguing about removing multiform or that it shouldn't be there. I think the complaint is that its cost is not accurately reflecting its effectiveness as seen in in obvious simple ways, some of whom reflect the basic genre characters.

 

I mean, to me the basic bargain basement examples of multiform are the werewolves and the hulk. These are reflected by having a normal form which is relatively cheap, but often skilled, and a combat form which is raw power. Buying those as their simplest multiform, we end up with in a 350 pt game a 350 pt combat form and a 100-150 pt human form... which is better than having a single 350 pt form unless very specific build details are done.

 

A multiform power that fails to meet these IMO iconic examples of what multiform is form in terms of cost to effectiveness is an inappropriately built power... IMO... if one is looking for cost reflecting effectiveness.

The Mage with a Polymorph spell is a fantastic example of this. The present structure allows such a spell to be functional.

Why couldn't a varsion of multiform which recognized the value of "alternative characters" with added cost (just like multipowers recognize the value of "alternative attacks" with extra cost) be functional?

 

When i want an extra attack, an 8d6 AP blast to go with my 12d6 EB, I don't get to shout "genre" and get it for free, points off the side on some other sheet, do I? No? I have to buy some cheap slots... at 6 cp each or so.

 

So why does this become "free cheap points thrown on some other sheet" when instead of an alternative 60 pt attack its an entirely new 350 pt character?

 

As an example... taking a mage's polymorph spell.... what is the issue with having the multiform cost reflected in its versatility that insists the cost for extra forms be allowed to be effectively free, off on some other sheet?

 

 

The cost of Hero's flexibility is risk of abuse. Are there any games out there that have no potential for abuse, and are still playable?

 

I dont think the issue is potential for abuse but simply a matter of what cost is supposed to do... reflect effectiveness... and with multipower, within obvious simple examples, the cost does not seem to reflect effectiveness. if it doesn't reflect effectiveness in the simple cases, why believe it does so in the more complex ones?

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Multiform Question

 

It seems like everyone is comparing static costs as opposed to future costs.

 

XP spent on a character with Multiform has diminishing returns. Take Beast-Boy from Teen Titans for an example. The character has the same Mind in every form. If the character buys any CSL's he has to buy them for every form which in turn drives up the cost of the Multiform power itself. Yes, it's a very minor balancing amount in the grand scheme but it's there.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Tesuji, while I see the costing issue, I note the lack of any suggestions for revising the Multiform rules to be consistent with the overall internal structure, while still permitting valid uses of the power (such as the Wizard who can shapeshift into a Dragon).

 

Presumably, a "fair" cost would be a pool for the Multiform itself, plus a "slot cost" for each form, equating this to a Multipower. Given the similarlity to Ultra slots, 1/10 for each slot would seem to make logical sense.

 

However, if I presume Multiform is unbalanced at present, presumably Duplication (allowing me to have a huge number of less than campaign max forms) must also be unbalanced. Which other powers also need recosting?

 

Absent a superior costing system, I'm inclined to stick with the one we have, and GM monitoring.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Tesuji, while I see the costing issue, I note the lack of any suggestions for revising the Multiform rules to be consistent with the overall internal structure, while still permitting valid uses of the power (such as the Wizard who can shapeshift into a Dragon).

 

Presumably, a "fair" cost would be a pool for the Multiform itself, plus a "slot cost" for each form, equating this to a Multipower. Given the similarlity to Ultra slots, 1/10 for each slot would seem to make logical sense.

 

However, if I presume Multiform is unbalanced at present, presumably Duplication (allowing me to have a huge number of less than campaign max forms) must also be unbalanced. Which other powers also need recosting?

 

Absent a superior costing system, I'm inclined to stick with the one we have, and GM monitoring.

 

Some cost-shift ideas:

 

http://www.herogames.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1314923&postcount=9

 

What you do determines where you get to, I suppose, and what evil it is that you wish to overcome.

[tesuji]

Re: Multiform Question

 

 

Tesuji, while I see the costing issue, I note the lack of any suggestions for revising the Multiform rules to be consistent with the overall internal structure, while still permitting valid uses of the power (such as the Wizard who can shapeshift into a Dragon).

Ok so what is the problem with a wizard that can shaopeshift into a dragon which requires the current multiform rules be in place as they are? Why wouldn't that work in a multiform which required every form pay the cost?

 

is it that the dragon form is "too expensive" to fit within the normal campaign limits? For instance is the "valid use" you insist is there building a 200 pt dragon form spell in a 150 pt limit game?

 

I see people saying how it has to be this way to allow certain builds, but to me that seems odd... that something has to be mispricing things to work right?

 

let me touch on one example, which might be similar, i have seen...

 

In a 350 pt game, a player might want to play beast boy and need to be able to multiform into a 400 pt dt-rex with beast boys brain form. So, considering that asa valid example, multiform cannot be limited to "max cp including multiform points".

 

My response is RUBBISH.

 

you dont need a misfiring multiform to fix the problem, you need the Gm to step up and say "hey, a 400 pt character is OK for this game, so you guys can be over 350." and realize that monkeying with the costs to bring a 400 pt character in under a 350 pt wire is not the better or appropriate approach.

 

Now, some Gms may say "well, you know, the 400 pt trex isn't as optimized as a "real" 400 pt pc build would be, so while i would allow the trex with beast boys brain, I wont want to allow a 400 pt blaster or brick. they just aren't competitive. So thats why i make the exception for multiform" and again i say RUBBISH.

 

The point is valid but the target is off. Its absolutely fine IMo to realize the difference in effectiveness in a straight from the book dino form and a build from scratch superhero and realize a 400 pt dino with a brain isn't as potent as a 400 pt energy blaster and thus decide to make an exception for the dino and allow it... but the EXCEPTIOn you make is to your point cap, not to how multiform costs characters.

 

You don't need a broken multiform that produces bogus costs to enable the GM to waive his point cap restirction when he feels its appropriate.

 

Presumably, a "fair" cost would be a pool for the Multiform itself, plus a "slot cost" for each form, equating this to a Multipower. Given the similarlity to Ultra slots, 1/10 for each slot would seem to make logical sense.

I wouldn't argue with that as a base pricing scheme. However, to meet some genre elements i might have some differences...

 

In addition to the "built from scratch" forms, I would have some adders for "common crature types of low point totals".

 

For example... for +10 cp i might allow a multiform slot for "normal animal forms costing lsss than 1/2 (or maybe 1/5) the max of the multiform". that would enable many "animal man" characters where a hero can turn into any of the thousdands of animal types without charging him for every different species... most of them are just SFX anyway.

 

Basically, charge for the full slot cost for individual forms when they approach "full campaign effectiveness" and allow a cheap low price adder for "groups of forms of very low point totals"

 

However, if I presume Multiform is unbalanced at present, presumably Duplication (allowing me to have a huge number of less than campaign max forms) must also be unbalanced. Which other powers also need recosting?

arguably any which are derived from multiform.

Absent a superior costing system, I'm inclined to stick with the one we have, and GM monitoring.

 

the costing system i would recommend is 1/10 of the cost for each form as the price of multiform. every form pays for the multiform cost. For 1/10 of the multiform max, you can have a "common group" of forms permitted by the gm to allow you to assume common forms suitable to the campaign as long as none of them is worth more than 1/2 the normal character limit. So for a 75+75 cp game the hero could for 15 cp buy "normal animals" and assume any animal form of 75 cp or less. He would have to pay another 15 cp to have a 150 cp tiger form however since that is above the 1/2.

 

Insert necessary language about forms and disads and such. Note that normal animals would have normal animal restrictions and disads even if they were built on sufficiently low points to avoid "needing" any disads.

 

the above would not permit a mage in a 150 pt game having a dragon form of 300 cp, but to me the answer to that is NOT breaking multiform but in havihg the Gm make the exact same determination "the dragon form is ok even if it is over points" for his CAMPAIGN LIMIT of 150.

 

the 1/10 is simple, direct and follows existing hero costing patterns for "alternatives."

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multiform Question

 

the costing system i would recommend is 1/10 of the cost for each form as the price of multiform. every form pays for the multiform cost. For 1/10 of the multiform max, you can have a "common group" of forms permitted by the gm to allow you to assume common forms suitable to the campaign as long as none of them is worth more than 1/2 the normal character limit. So for a 75+75 cp game the hero could for 15 cp buy "normal animals" and assume any animal form of 75 cp or less. He would have to pay another 15 cp to have a 150 cp tiger form however since that is above the 1/2.

**********************************************************

the 1/10 is simple, direct and follows existing hero costing patterns for "alternatives."

 

The only "alternatives" Hero allows that cost 1/10 of the points is a Multipower, for which one must first pay the full cost of the pool. Your concept has no such pool, so claiming it to be analogous seems inappropriate.

 

Can I put my Multiforms in a framework? Let's say a 20 point Multripower with several 2 point slots, and perhaps a slot for "as many low point forms as I want"? Perhaps a VPP of "Multiform only". These issues do, of course, exist within the current system as well.

 

Even without that, "as many low point forms as I want" provides plenty of room for abuse, so that issue isn't solved. Form of normal human with KS: What I currently need to know on a 32- is a 25 point form. Even if I won't remember it when I morph back, I can tell one of my teammates.

[GAZZA]

Re: Multiform Question

 

I think tesuji has a valid point, if I'm understanding it correctly.

 

The point was made that with the 4th edition "Base Form is the most expensive form" ruling, a FH wizard couldn't have his Polymorph spell. I'll come back to whether Multiform is even the way to do this in a moment, but let's assume for the moment it is.

 

Why can't the FH wizard have such a spell? Presumably because the thing he wants to Polymorph into has more points than the wizard has. Since the wizard is (presumably) on the same point total as the other PCs, this argument boils down to saying that wizards should be be allowed to have spells that are more cost efficient than anything a non-wizard can do ... and that just doesn't seem right to me. You're a 150 point wizard complaining that you can't Multiform into a 250 point dragon? I'm not sympathetic. Make a 125 point version of the dragon (which would be allowed even under 4th edition rules) and you're cooking.

 

Now, returning to the specific example: why would you want to simulate Polymorph with Multiform anyway? Traditionally a wizard keeps his own mind while Polymorphed, and can even still cast spells. It sounds far more likely that what you want to do is figure out what extra abilities the polymorphed form has, and buy them directly (in a power framework if you want to be able to change into lots of different things). For example, you might buy some Regeneration, extra STR, CON, BODY, STUN, and defences, a little Growth, and a Reduced Penetration HKA as your "troll" form. Gather all that up into a bundle, put a "Costs END" on it, and slap on some limitations to reflect that you need to cast a spell to get it to work (which will vary by the ground rules of the campaign), and you're done. It's almost certainly going to be cheaper than a Multiform anyway.

 

Polymorph, to my mind, is a spectacularly bad example since it is generally very fluid (lots of different forms) and you certainly don't want to be statting out every single thing you might conceivably want to turn into as a Multiform. Much easier to have a small VPP or even Multipower linked to a Shapeshift, and you just jot down what the settings are as you assume a new form.

 

Hulk, werewolf, that sort of thing - sure, go Multiform. But it's not (by any means) the only way to handle a shapeshifter, and it's often not even the best way, since many concepts don't include the personality of the shapeshifter completely changing (which is the area Multiform offers the clearly best solution).

[Rapier]

Re: Multiform Question

 

In general, Multiform does at least imply a separate personality. But it doesn't have to. Requiring the mage to purchase all of the stats of a dragon (even if within campaign character limits) is going to be rather point intensive. Even if dumped into a MultiPower (thus gaining the Ultra Slot cost break), the Reserve would still have to be large enough to encompass the Active Cost of all the abilities.

 

Requiring the mage to purchase the powers through an MP would be overly restrictive (it is doubtful that the character would have many points left over). As a GM it would be a pain in the butt. Instead of having a separate character sheet for hte dragon form, I have a compound power with a loose list of abilities and powers. The single spell will also take up a significant amount of room on the character sheet, making it difficult to use the character sheet.

 

While, as a general rule, Multiform is the preferred choice for situations where the personality is different from the base form, it does not necessarily require a differing personality. For all of the reasons above, I would very much allow (and even urge) the mage to use MultiForm to build a Polymorph spell and retain his own personality.

 

I agree that if the campaign limit is characters built on 150 pts, that a mage should not expect to be able to create a 350 pt dragon. I would also limit him to a 150 pt dragon.

 

The cost for multiple forms is only 5 pts for a doubling. You can get an awful lot of forms fairly cheaply. I was never very happy with the D&D method where a mage who had never even seen a badger could Polymorph into one. The Hero method is much more realistic, IMO. The mage can only Polymorph into forms that he has studied and prepared.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multiform Question

 

I think tesuji has a valid point, if I'm understanding it correctly.

*********************************************************

The point was made that with the 4th edition "Base Form is the most expensive form" ruling, a FH wizard couldn't have his Polymorph spell.

 

Why can't the FH wizard have such a spell? Presumably because the thing he wants to Polymorph into has more points than the wizard has. Since the wizard is (presumably) on the same point total as the other PCs, this argument boils down to saying that wizards should be be allowed to have spells that are more cost efficient than anything a non-wizard can do ... and that just doesn't seem right to me. You're a 150 point wizard complaining that you can't Multiform into a 250 point dragon? I'm not sympathetic. Make a 125 point version of the dragon (which would be allowed even under 4th edition rules) and you're cooking.

 

Perhaps it is a player complaining that the system should accomodate an ability which is not uncommon in the genre. Hero lays claim to being a UNIVERSAL role playing system. It should be able to simulate the abilities we see in the various genres. If you wish, in your game, to say "no one may have a Multiform which permits the alternate form to exceed campaign limits", that is your prerogative. But the potential for doing this is very much in genre, and should not be impossible under the rules.

 

For myself, I look at each use of the ability. Multiform into your Superhero form? Well, that form's really the character, isn't it? That form should be restricted to the campaign limits. Polymorph into a Rock Troll, with numerous limitations and restrictions? Well, that kind of thing isn't that far out for fantasy wizards.

 

For example' date=' you might buy some Regeneration, extra STR, CON, BODY, STUN, and defences, a little Growth, and a Reduced Penetration HKA as your "troll" form. Gather all that up into a bundle, put a "Costs END" on it, and slap on some limitations to reflect that you need to cast a spell to get it to work (which will vary by the ground rules of the campaign), and you're done. It's almost certainly going to be cheaper than a Multiform anyway.[/quote']

 

Have you worked the AP on that "troll form? That sets my MP pool. Let's say 2 Regen (20 AP), +20 STR (20 AP), +15 CON (30 AP), +5 BOD (10 AP), +5 PD and ED, resistant (15 AP) and 1 level Growth (5 point) and I'll get the extra STUN from STR, CON and BOD. That's 100 AP. My RSR to change is at a -10 penalty. Those 50 AP spells will be a snap if I have a decent chance at pulling this one off. And I may as well shell out another 3 or 4 points for a 20d6 Energy Blast, or a 6 1/d6 KA, spell - after all, I have the 100 point pool, right? Maybe 10d6 NND, or 8d6 NND Accurate. You're also assuming the magic system in question even allows the use of a Multipower. And the Troll isn't vulnerable to [fire/sunlight/whatever campaign ground rules you have]. Multiform is the way we change disadvantages when changing abilities.

[Vestnik]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Have you worked the AP on that "troll form? That sets my MP pool. Let's say 2 Regen (20 AP)' date=' +20 STR (20 AP), +15 CON (30 AP), +5 BOD (10 AP), +5 PD and ED, resistant (15 AP) and 1 level Growth (5 point) and I'll get the extra STUN from STR, CON and BOD. That's 100 AP. My RSR to change is at a -10 penalty. Those 50 AP spells will be a snap if I have a decent chance at pulling this one off. And I may as well shell out another 3 or 4 points for a 20d6 Energy Blast, or a 6 1/d6 KA, spell - after all, I have the 100 point pool, right? Maybe 10d6 NND, or 8d6 NND Accurate. You're also assuming the magic system in question even allows the use of a Multipower. And the Troll isn't vulnerable to [fire/sunlight/whatever campaign ground rules you have']. Multiform is the way we change disadvantages when changing abilities.

 

Could you get the new Disads by using Side Effects?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Could you get the new Disads by using Side Effects?

 

Potentially, but kludgy. They have to work out to appropriate fractions of each form's cost to work mechanically, and they aren't a "standard" side effect, so GM permission is required.