Multiform Question

[Rapier]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Could you get the new Disads by using Side Effects?

 

I suppose that's possible, but there are no rules or guidelines in how to do so. Side Effect is predominantly based upon the Active Cost of the power to determine the Active Cost of the Side Effect. Powers and Disads don't interact very well like that.

[Vestnik]

Re: Multiform Question

 

I suppose that's possible' date=' but there are no rules or guidelines in how to do so. Side Effect is predominantly based upon the Active Cost of the power to determine the Active Cost of the Side Effect. Powers and Disads don't interact very well like that.[/quote']

 

IIRC (I'm at work, no books here), Disads purchased as Side Effects also have to heal back like damage.

[GAZZA]

Re: Multiform Question

 

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' date=' 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.[/quote']

Well... as a recent return to the fold of HERO after many years in the wilderness of d20 (not by choice, I assure you), I can't really let that slide. Polymorph (and shapechanging magic in general) is one of the most heavily abused constructs in most fantasy games that allow it (it's certainly broken in 3rd edition D&D, whichever version you use). "Fixing" it so that it's not broken is quite difficult (though Rich Burlew took a pretty good stab at it), largely because most fantasy spells don't have any discernable structure for balancing them.

 

FH, of course, is an exception - because you're building spells as powers with points, it ought to be possible (at least in principle) to balance this sort of thing.

 

I grant you that in most fantasy fiction wizards are considerably more powerful than their mundane counterparts. I submit, however, that encouraging that sort of thing in an RPG is a quick route to player dissatisfaction on behalf of the non-wizards (it's certainly true in D&D that playing a non-spellcaster is a weak choice; I'd hate for FH to go the same route).

 

As an aside, incidentally, if we're trying to simulate something near a D&D Polymorph/Shapechange spell, then Multiform can't get us there unless you're going to allow it in a VPP, since D&D has no limitations on how many forms you can take. And if you've already opened up the possibility of a VPP, you may well find that Multiform becomes unnecessary to simulate this. Multiform is limited to a finite number of shapes (which would make me very reluctant to allow it in a VPP, but YMMV).

 

Polymorph into a Rock Troll, with numerous limitations and restrictions? Well, that kind of thing isn't that far out for fantasy wizards.

I'm not at all convinced a reasonable version of said Rock Troll for 150 pts could not be created.

 

Have you worked the AP on that "troll form? That sets my MP pool.

No, because that is tricky to judge. In some campaigns a troll might well be a valid choice for a starting PC; in another it would be an epic monster.

 

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.

Err, no, you won't, since characteristics in a multipower get No Figured "for free".

 

In any case, yes, you've demonstrated that a 100 AP Multipower would be required to pull this off. However, this is a fairly campaign specific choice you've made there. Many FH campaigns (including those I've run) use VPPs rather than Multipowers, and nothing in that list has more than 30 active points. With the right limitations, I could see that fitting into a 40 point VPP (or less).

 

I realise I did say "Multipower" to begin with, and I'll stand by it for some conceptions. For example, a Multipower with variable slots for Growth, Shrinking, Density Increase, and perhaps HKA works pretty well for a ShapeShifting pool limited to animal forms. But you probably do need a VPP for a fully functional shapeshifter.

 

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.

Well yes, but I don't believe the implied argument "but it should be way easier because this is a minor advantage" is exactly uncontroversial.

 

And the Troll isn't vulnerable to [fire/sunlight/whatever campaign ground rules you have].

Yes, evidently the troll choice was an ill-advised example (though as others have pointed out you could do this with Side Effects - I'm not suggesting that gets me off the hook, though).

 

Don't get me wrong, I am not by any means suggesting that Multiform has no place and is always a horribly abusive power. Rather I'm suggesting the reverse - in exactly the same way that not every "force field" is represented by the Force Field power (sometimes Armour or Force Wall makes more sense), you shouldn't always reach straight for Multiform when you have a shapeshifting character. In particular, since Multiform is (in essence) a Multipower of Characters, you should be wary of allowing power frameworks on anything other than the base form (at least as wary as you would be of allowing someone to stick an EC in a Multipower slot).

 

Oh, and to those suggesting that this clutters up the character sheet rather than having a nice new character sheet - was there some particular reason you couldn't write out a new character sheet anyway?

[Vestnik]

Re: Multiform Question

 

I grant you that in most fantasy fiction wizards are considerably more powerful than their mundane counterparts.

 

I dunno -- I've seen David Copperfield pull off some pretty mean stuff.

[tesuji]

Re: Multiform Question

 

 

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.

Hugh, i know you know better than this, but OK I will spell it out since that might cut thru the smoke and mirrors...

 

350 pt CHARACTER BUILD has ONE 60 ap attack power. he wants two, or lets say three. So how does he do this? He buys a multipower with three slots. Instead of paying 60 he pays 60 plus three slots at 1/10th.... So instead of having spent 60 and having one attack and having 290 pts left, he spends 78 and has three attack alternatives and has 272 left. ***The PRICE for getting the three choices of attack instead of one was three x 1/10 their cost.***

 

350 pt CHARACTER BUILD has one 350 pt form that gives him 350 pts to spend. Player wants to have three forms. How does he do this, he buys multiform. He pays 1/10 of the cost for each of his three 350 pt forms. ***The PRICE for getting the three choices for his form was two times 1/10 of their cost***

 

NOTE the similarity... it is analogous... not identical...to the way multipower slots work.

Can I put my Multiforms in a framework?

My choice would be NO. You cannot put frameworks into other frameworks, and multiform is analogous to multipowers already.

Similarly it is uncommon to allow even the more routine 1/5 cost elements into frameworks at their 1/5 cost... followers, vehicles and such, so again I dont come down on the side of allowing multiforms into frameworks.

 

but of course, anything can be allowed with Gm fiat.

 

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.

yes but bringing up ass many boogeymen as possible always serves discussions 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.

Uhhh... again hugh, you seem to have missed the point...

 

"common forms" is as described by the Gm for his campaign.

 

Are 25 cp humans with a single KS at 32- in that specific knowledge common in his world? if so, whats the problem? The player could alternatively look one of these savant morons up in the phone book and get his answer.

 

if the savants arent common, then they dont get to fall under a "common group" clause.

 

But the key difference between us is highlighted in your example... yours is an example of how the power CAN be abused if it is tried to be... if a weird example is tried like your 32- savant case.

 

the problem with the current multiform isn't that it CAN be abused if worked at but that it doesn't cost appropriately when used normally. the "abuse" is inherent with simple core iconic characters.

 

the werewolf with trained human.... not an abusive concept... prices out to a 350 pt combat form and a highly skilled guy with effectively NO COSt since the human form absorbs the multiform price. Same with the hulk-banner. Very simple easy builds of common archtypes push the "price" off the sheet to the "base form" and lose the obvious sense of trade off.

 

Now, in such situations, SOME of these can be fashioned into balance. If you deliberately add-in other traits like accidental change and the like, and specifically build the forms to create trade-offs, then you can wind up with a cost to effectiveness thats in sync, but this is, IMo poor design... poor rules design... to have the onus be on forcing into the build additional "couterbalance elements" to make the cost work right.

 

In hERO 4, a simple iconic build... jaguar or whatever his name was... of a combat form and skilled human resource guy form was IMO better mechanically balanced without needing to have counter-elements within the build, because the "combat form" could not have the same total available points, as other characters since he was spending points on the multiform.

 

but certainly, nothing will please everyone, at least until its printed in HERO 6th.

[tesuji]

Re: Multiform Question

 

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.

 

Indeed, but if that is the case, why do we need to break multiform's costing system?

 

Why not instead revisist the notion of "campaign limit"?

 

If the rock troll or "sometimes a rock troll" guy is OK for the campaign, then why setup a campaign limit that says "rock troll is unacceptable" in the first place?

 

if the ability to enter combat in a 20 pt rock troll form is ACCEPTABLE for your game, why setup a campaign limit that says "you cannot buy a rock troll"?

 

the answer to "this character exceeds the campaign limit on X" is NOT to rewrite the costing scheme so that the same characters appears to fit within X, but to change the limit.

 

What we basically have with multiform as the answer to this "problem" is akin to saying "in his game the campaign limit on attacks is 75 ap so you cannot have a 6d6 RKA, unless you buy your attack thru your follower in which case his attack is 90/5 and so it is under 75 ap."

 

No gm i know would jump at that as an answer to "why cannot i have a 6d6 rka in a 75 ap limit game" but several seem hunkey dorey with using multiform the same way..

[Rapier]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Polymorph (and shapechanging magic in general) is one of the most heavily abused constructs in most fantasy games that allow it (it's certainly broken in 3rd edition D&D' date=' whichever version you use). "Fixing" it so that it's [b']not[/b] broken is quite difficult (though Rich Burlew took a pretty good stab at it), largely because most fantasy spells don't have any discernable structure for balancing them.

 

FH, of course, is an exception - because you're building spells as powers with points, it ought to be possible (at least in principle) to balance this sort of thing.

 

Oh, and to those suggesting that this clutters up the character sheet rather than having a nice new character sheet - was there some particular reason you couldn't write out a new character sheet anyway?

 

There was a couple of good things in there, which I probably snipped out for brevity. I completely agree the Polymorph has always been a royal pain in the dracoforms butt. You've got this wizard that can cast some spell to turn him into a real live dragon. In the meantime, the warrior just got a fancy sword. I can even see the warrior look over at the dragony-mage and look down at his sword, shrug and throw his sword away and walk back towards town. Although this was a real problem with many of the old D&D spells. There were no concrete rules to spell development, and thus balancing.

 

I think I said it somewhere above. I think that the nature of Hero has taken a very good stab at defeating that problem. The fact that you have to purchase all your powers or spells with points does allow for a "rough" balancing that is not there in many other gaming systems.

 

I agree that some of us seem to be saying that [they've] 'seen Multiform abused in such a manner that a 350 pt character has a 900 pt Multiform.' I very much believe that. Does that mean that MF is broken? I don't think so. We've all seen those builds, 1pip RKA Penetrating +50 STUNx, EDM UAO, etc. Some powers take a little more thought before approval than others. Is MultiForm one of them? Sure is. Not only do I need to make sure that the MF is built on appropriate point totals (and I'm hard pressed to not look askance at anyone that tells me that 350 points is not enough to build Form X. That is the same look I give when a player says "but 350 points isn't enough to build the Crisis SuperMan.") but that the MF meets the rest of the campaign guidelines.

 

I would disapporove/require alteration to a MF that had a SPD 8 and 45 DEX (if the campaign was limited to 5 SPD and 30 DEX). Simply because the MF doesn't exist on the very same sheet as your main character or because the MF is not your main character, does not mean that it is not a character in the game and should be allowed to be built to outside of the campaign guidelines.

 

Clutter was only part of my reasoning. The character needs to create a huge compound power that takes up a rather large deal of character sheet real estate. It is also difficult for the player as they have to keep referring to this stack of abilities to figure out what their DEX is. Could there be another character sheet with the pesudo-MF character? Of course. It's just one more thing to keep in mind.

 

Why go to all the bother of developing a power that mimics Multiform when we already have Multiform?

[tesuji]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Why go to all the bother of developing a power that mimics Multiform when we already have Multiform?

 

Well, the multiform we already have puts as equivalent the following two characters... equivalent as in both are costed the same...

 

One character who is a 350 pt fire elemental elemental.

 

A second character who is a wizard built on 350 cp (of which about 80-85 cp are spent on multiform, less if it takes time to change) with the ability to transform into a 350 cp fire elemental, a 350 cp water elemental, a 350 cp earth elemental and a 350 cp air elemental as well.

 

Both come in for a 350 cp character since only the "base form" of the mage pays for the multiform cost.

 

now, almost everyone would agree I think that the second character can do more.... has more versatility in more situations... and that he is AS POWERFUL as the guy who can only ever be a 350 cp fire elemental... but some seem to feel that paying NOTHING for the extra versatility and flxibility is the way to go.

 

others, like me, believe there should be a cost and that shuffling the cost "off the page" to some other form is BAD RULE DESIGN.

 

For me specifically, since this can show up strongly in very simple straightforward builds of what i consider to be icnoic "multiform" character types, it further enforces the BAD RULE DESIGN conclusion.

 

But then, as seen above, there are those who seem to think we NEED to have powers that can break campaign limits to reflect certain genres, as opposed to me who instead thinks we need to set the campaign limits to reflect the genre in the first place, so that we dont have to break the limit we CHOOSE.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Multiform Question

 

 

..............................

My response is RUBBISH.

 

.....................

 

Don't knock yourself: you have some solid points there.

 

Captain Context

 

 

 

Hugh, i know you know better than this, but OK I will spell it out since that might cut thru the smoke and mirrors...

 

350 pt CHARACTER BUILD has ONE 60 ap attack power. he wants two, or lets say three. So how does he do this? He buys a multipower with three slots. Instead of paying 60 he pays 60 plus three slots at 1/10th.... So instead of having spent 60 and having one attack and having 290 pts left, he spends 78 and has three attack alternatives and has 272 left. ***The PRICE for getting the three choices of attack instead of one was three x 1/10 their cost.***

 

350 pt CHARACTER BUILD has one 350 pt form that gives him 350 pts to spend. Player wants to have three forms. How does he do this, he buys multiform. He pays 1/10 of the cost for each of his three 350 pt forms. ***The PRICE for getting the three choices for his form was two times 1/10 of their cost***

 

NOTE the similarity... it is analogous... not identical...to the way multipower slots work.

 

...........................

 

To make a more helpful point: the problem with MF is that the points you spend on it do not subtract from the available points. Watch:

 

Base Form: Matty Morph, spends 80 points on MF (350 point form x 4)

 

Form 1: Fire Form

Form 2: Earth Form

Form 3: Water Form

Form 4: Air Form

 

Now each of the forms can have a 60 point attack, and get the full benefit of all the 290 remaining points they are built on. No loss, 4 different attacks. hell, you could build the darned things identically but for the main attack, and still be valid. OK, it takes a half phase action to change, whereas it would take a 0 phase action with the multipower.

 

Now if you did charge the MF cost to all forms they would be starting on 350-80=270 each. Does that come off the base cost; presumably - so in fact, for a 200 point +150 disad game the base forms (using this example) would be built on 120+disads. They could still get to 350 but they would need a lot more limtiations.

 

The point I so labouriously make/agree with is that the form with multiform is not likely to be the one doing most of the combat and whatnot, so unless there is a cost to the FORMS, MF is, in effect, a free power.

 

That can't be good.

[OddHat]

Re: Multiform Question

 

now, almost everyone would agree I think that the second character can do more.... has more versatility in more situations... and that he is AS POWERFUL as the guy who can only ever be a 350 cp fire elemental... but some seem to feel that paying NOTHING for the extra versatility and flxibility is the way to go.

 

Myself, I'd say that in a campaign where one PC is playing a 350 point Fire Elemental / Giant / Super, allowing a Multiform user to assume an equivalent form is unfair to the Player of the Elemental / Giant / Super. I also agree that holding every form to the same campaign limits (save where special exemptions are made) while charging every form X points for the Multiform power is a pretty simple way to handle the potential problem. I don't agree that it's the only workable solution. The rules as written are quick and simple in practice for characters who only change into natural animals from the bestiary (and similar restricted groups), fantasy campaigns where the GM is trying to do quick port over of D&D style spells, etc. They do require GM oversight, which isn't uncommon in HERO.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Multiform Question

 

There's no reason you can't allow MF as writ but simply limit forms to (say) 250 points, in a 350 point game, without changing costs at all.

 

You can still get an awful lot of utility from a 250 point character, but they are far less likely to overshadow other characters.

 

That would be for a superhero game.

 

In a FH game you could allow points in excess of base CP, for dragonforms and such.

[OddHat]

Re: Multiform Question

 

There's no reason you can't allow MF as writ but simply limit forms to (say) 250 points, in a 350 point game, without changing costs at all.

 

You can still get an awful lot of utility from a 250 point character, but they are far less likely to overshadow other characters.

 

That would be for a superhero game.

 

In a FH game you could allow points in excess of base CP, for dragonforms and such.

Another good, easy to implement fix if you find the power problematic.

[tesuji]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Don't knock yourself: you have some solid points there.

 

Captain Context

 

thats hilarious... and gives me the idea for a new character to build... hmmm....

 

:-)

[tesuji]

Re: Multiform Question

 

There's no reason you can't allow MF as writ but simply limit forms to (say) 250 points, in a 350 point game, without changing costs at all.

 

You can still get an awful lot of utility from a 250 point character, but they are far less likely to overshadow other characters.

 

an interesting idea that could prevent the powe from becoming game breaking, hwever for me its treating the symptoms to keep it from getting too bad. I would rather fix the basic underlying cause - that multiform is effectively free power - than add pain killers to keep the symptoms in check.

 

Still tho, very workable for those who do not want to change rules in the toolkit.

 

ASIDE: Last post on this thread. Getting out before i tick off the mod any further. Better safe than sorry.

[OddHat]

Re: Multiform Question

 

ASIDE: Last post on this thread. Getting out before i tick off the mod any further. Better safe than sorry.

 

Post all you like.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multiform Question

 

Post all you like.

 

Seconded. Agree or disagree, tesuji's points are valid, and he makes the point without making anything personal.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Multiform Question

 

If I'm not too late to get in on this discussion, I think tesuji is absolutely right. I've never really carried my thoughts on this all the way to this conclusion before though. It's kind of an annoying power to use anyway, what with needing multiple character sheets and all, I usually look for a simpler way to do things (or a concept that doesn't require it - MultiForm can be a real MF of a power).

 

But seriously folks:

Let's say you're making a standard 350 (200+150) point superhero. If you buy a 14d6 EB, that costs 70 points. And once you've spent those points, you have 70 fewer points to spend on everything else.

But when you spend 70 points on a 350 alternate form, you haven't really "spent" anything. You still have 350 points to spend on that form.

 

Even a construct well within campaign limits is unbalanced, even using the "most expensive is the base form" convention:

350-point base form spends 50 points on four 200-point alternate forms. What happens? Well:

He's still got 300 points of characteristics, skills, and powers,

And he's got 800 more points of stuff which he can use in 200-point chunks at any given time,

And, since it's a 200+150 game, none of his other forms need to take *any* disadvantages at all!

And remember, we're still well below the 350 limit with the forms.

 

I think the only way MultiForm can be fair is to make each form pay something, such as in tesuji's suggestion. It may also be a good idea for additional forms to be an Advantage (even if it's only +1/4), rather than an Adder. Or require that each form be paid for separately, probably at a reduced cost after the first, like in 4th edition. After all, you really don't need an exponentially increasing number of forms, do you?

 

Note that Duplication already requires each duplicate to pay.

 

Based on tesuji's suggestion, these powers would have a basic cost structure like this:

 

Alternate form pays 1/10 of the points it has.

Duplicate pays 1/5 of the points it has.

Altered duplicate pays 2/5 of its points.

 

And then some additional cost for additional forms/duplicates, which could be an adder, advantage, or additional purchase.