Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

[Vondy]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

My house rule for 5E was simply that you couldn't have a character worth more points than the base setting rules.

 

This was my basic rule of thumb, too.

[ideasmith]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

I would make sure that the character will spend significant time in his/her/its weakest form. Steve Long may have thought this too obvious to mention.

[Dr.Device]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

My rule on this is pretty simple, and seems perfectly fair to me.

 

Every form pays for multiform as if that form were the base form.

 

Example 1:

Robot Boy has two forms. His base form is a 150pt normal, and his second form is a 350pt Living Robot (Robot Robot). His normal form pays 70pts for multiform, and his Living Robot form pays 30pts.

 

Example 2:

The Mammal has five forms. He has a 200pt normal form, a 150pt ferret form, a 300pt cougar form, a 250pt horse form, and a 350pt elephant form. All the forms except for the elephant form pay 80pts (350/5 +10). The elephant form pays 70pts (300/5 +10).

 

I have considered going to a version where each form only pays the points for the forms that it can directly shift to. In that case, if the Mammal could had to go through human form to shift to a different animal, then each form, other than human, would just pay 40pts to shift to human, and the human form would pay 80 for access to all forms.

[torchwolf]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

I can agree with those who see it as something the system does not adress.

 

When would a player who wants a character with four superpowered forms not be better off to have a 5th form, one with basically no super-abilities who just pays for the Multiform?

 

Having that potential, which is supported by much of the source material, to have what is basically a throwaway character pay for the Multiform means that the actual character(s) - the form(s) that will see more play than the OIHID character's non-heroic ID - are paying nothing for the ability to have multiple forms. Thus, this added flexibility becomes free.

 

The rules do nothing to balance this ability, but merely leave it in the GM's lap to reject unbalanced concepts.

 

Could there be a different rule? Sure. For example, the rules could require that EVERY form pay the cost of the Multiforms, such that no one form can have as many points available for other abilities as the character who only has one form.

 

That was my thought also, upon pondering it, but that the cost would be reduced to 1/10th instead of 1/5th, as well as possibly dropping the doubling adder (Post 12).

 

In essence, Multiform can be used to make a "Dial-a-Hero" one-character superteam.

Real Game Example: Back in 1990 or so, I allowed a Champions PC who was a Mentalist possessed by a demon Brick. I told the player I reserved the right to revise it, and after seeing how it was abused in play, I invoked that right. The player was not that cooperative, so I let the demon side take over and run rampant; then he elected to build another character rather than revise his old one - and pronto, I had a new campaign villain to bedevil my PCs. If I hadn't seen it coming, though, it might have turned out differently.

[Kdansky]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

I usually use these guidelines:

 

- If one of the forms is clearly the best at combat (without having huge Complications such as 14- Berserk or Vulnerability to Oxygen or similar), then that form is supposed to have as many points as the other characters, but need not pay for the multiform. This guarantees it has similar effectiveness like anyone else when points matter most (combat is rules-heavy and RP-light in my games, and I'm probably not the exception there).

 

- If one of the forms is exceptionally weak and the character will be forced spend a lot of time in it (such as the human disguise for a demon), then that form is allowed to pay the (now quite irrelevant) cost for the multiform.

 

- Forms that won't see use are not allowed to pay the points for the power.

 

It is very efficient under these guidelines to build a combat form and a non-combat form, while letting the non-combat form pay the power. I think that is acceptable.

These guidelines work fairly well (challenge me and offer me a concept for me to judge if you feel like it )

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

My house rule for 5E was simply that you couldn't have a character worth more points than the base setting rules. So if you are playing 350 point supers' date=' Dragonboy can't play a 1200 point dragon that he morphs into at will and dump the multiform cost on his alternate human form, that he mostly spends time in "off camera". However, he might be able to get that 1200 point dragon, if he takes a heapin' helpin' of limitations to bring the "cost" of that form down to 350 - for example if he can only change with the help of his magical dragon ring (OIF, -1/2), once per day (-2). It's pretty clear in that scenario what's the "base form", and who pays the points. It's also clear what form he'll spend most of his time in.[/quote']

 

I think this is critical - Multiform, like anything else, should not be a means of evading the campaign limits. The ability to exceed the campaign point base is no different from the ability to exceed DC, OCV, DCV, active point, defense or whatever other limits are imposed on the campaign. In my games, that means I might allow a balanced exception, similar to yours above, where the Wizard can take on a Draconic form far more powerful than his own points, but only if there are restrictions and drawbacks to his spell which balance this advantage out, not to have a spell that allows the wizard to generally be a 300 point Dragon rather than a 150 point Wizard most of the time.

 

The "base form" is the 350' date=' or 150 pointer, or whatever it is, that everybody else is playing with. If the player wants lower point forms, then that's not an issue: he's paying points for some flexibility. [/quote']

 

Is he? If he has an 80 point form with a 30 point Multiform into a 150 point form, that can be problematic as well where the 80 point form is loaded up with, say, interaction and investigation skills (the ancient Wizard, or frail Bard, perhaps) and the 150 point form is 150 points of pure combat power. Both the player who built a combat monster with virtually no abilities outside combat, and the fellow who invested 80 points in noncombat abilities and only 70 in combat abilities, and as such is not highly effective in combat, would likely be irked - and justifiably so - if the Multiform character is equal to, or better than, their character in its area of strength, and also lacks their characters' respective areas of weakness.

 

I would make sure that the character will spend significant time in his/her/its weakest form. Steve Long may have thought this too obvious to mention.

 

How "obvious" is it from source material? Characters like Captain Marvel and the Hulk spend very little combat time in their weakest form. Should such characters not be allowed in the game, or should the game seek a reasonable accommodation where such characters are allowed to exist on a basis competitive with - neither overpowering nor being overpowered by - characters having only one form?

 

My rule on this is pretty simple, and seems perfectly fair to me.

 

Every form pays for multiform as if that form were the base form.

 

Again, however, this just means I want to keep Billy Batson from developing much in the way of useful abilities, since they reduce Captain Marvel's combat points. I'll pay for some skills usable in Weakling form by selling back the Weakling's CV's and physical stats, I suppose - once he balances at 5 or less, reducing the numbers further serves no purpose. He may as well sell back his eyesight as well.

[tesuji]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

I would make sure that the character will spend significant time in his/her/its weakest form. Steve Long may have thought this too obvious to mention.

 

 

My problem with adopting this approach for my games is - i am now scripting the game and events to make the system work right. i want the system to work for me and for my game, not for us to work for the system.

 

Also depending on structure this may be widely innappropriate.

For example consider a "typical animated series" where the emphasis is on short episodic quick action one offs. usually little or no time in spent on the "non-super stuff" may be minimal due to the pacing demands (unlike many other supers genres which may spend a lot of time on the secret ID stuff.

 

But frankly, either concept - most of the time i am in hero id and "most of the time i am in normal id - ought to be calculable and usable just fine, but that requires a costing structure that doesn't make the mf effectively free so you have a benchmark to guage "how much other stuff".

 

I mean, she-hulk could go back normal, at least at various points in her development but just preferred to be green. As a Gm i would really feel silly saying "sorry but i cannot let that concept in because multiform is written to assume you spend lot of time in non-green form."

 

Moreover, the assumption should be like unto that used in multipowers.

 

When you pay for a multipower there is no presumption "you will use the first slot more than the rest" or anything like that. They charge you for having multiple options and assume you as character will be choosing the one you want at any given moment. Since you have paid for the utility, the fact that you use it is assumed.

 

With multiform there is no real cost paid for the utility, so the focus and onus seems to turn to "prevent abuse" instead of "enable use".

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

My rule on this is pretty simple, and seems perfectly fair to me.

 

Every form pays for multiform as if that form were the base form.

 

Example 1:

Robot Boy has two forms. His base form is a 150pt normal, and his second form is a 350pt Living Robot (Robot Robot). His normal form pays 70pts for multiform, and his Living Robot form pays 30pts.

 

Example 2:

The Mammal has five forms. He has a 200pt normal form, a 150pt ferret form, a 300pt cougar form, a 250pt horse form, and a 350pt elephant form. All the forms except for the elephant form pay 80pts (350/5 +10). The elephant form pays 70pts (300/5 +10).

 

I have considered going to a version where each form only pays the points for the forms that it can directly shift to. In that case, if the Mammal could had to go through human form to shift to a different animal, then each form, other than human, would just pay 40pts to shift to human, and the human form would pay 80 for access to all forms.

 

Nice! I like that option! Similar to mine, but not quite as harsh if there's really going to be a scenario like the 400pt+100pt superhero or something. Of course both have their issues with calculating in the cost of the actual Multiform, but that's always likely to be a trade-off. This one gives some fun possibilities. I like that idea of a graph of what form can shift into what. Rep!

[Fireg0lem]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

I've also been considering this. My preferred solution is that all forms have to pay 100% of the real cost of the whole multiform. This means that if the base form has the MF in a power construct, the alternate forms have to pay the full cost, not the 1/5 or 1/10 (MP) or 0 (VPP).

[ideasmith]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

How "obvious" is it from source material? Characters like Captain Marvel and the Hulk spend very little combat time in their weakest form. Should such characters not be allowed in the game, or should the game seek a reasonable accommodation where such characters are allowed to exist on a basis competitive with - neither overpowering nor being overpowered by - characters having only one form?

 

Not obvious enough, but both Billy Batson and Bruce Banner got attacked often enough.

 

Billy Batson got 'captured in the surprise phase' quite frequently.

 

Bruce Banner avoided turning into the Hulk, and preferred trying to run from combat. The Hulk's enemies tended to either be faster than Bruce Banner or have ranged attacks.

 

I think the solution here is to have Billy Batson/Bruce Banner emulators spend combat time the same way the characters they emulate do, if perhaps more often.

[Markdoc]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

Is he? If he has an 80 point form with a 30 point Multiform into a 150 point form' date=' that can be problematic as well where the 80 point form is loaded up with, say, interaction and investigation skills (the ancient Wizard, or frail Bard, perhaps) and the 150 point form is 150 points of pure combat power. Both the player who built a combat monster with virtually no abilities outside combat, and the fellow who invested 80 points in noncombat abilities and only 70 in combat abilities, and as such is not highly effective in combat, would likely be irked - and justifiably so - if the Multiform character is equal to, or better than, their character in its area of strength, and also lacks their characters' respective areas of weakness.[/quote']

 

Yes, but remember my guideline: if the game is based on 150 points, the base character is the 150 (now 120 with the points for the multipower not counted) point character - not the 80 point schlub. I don't allow schlubbing the cost off onto a lower cost character that doesn't see much play. So you can go large, if you limit the ability to use those powers and you can go small, without limitation, but you can't go small and then say, "Oh, BTW, the small guys payin'" to get your multiform for free.

 

Even so, it must be granted that a character with several multiforms, none of which are especially combat powerful, but each of which is specialised in one thing, can still be a highly powerful character. I've played such a character (called Gestalt) who was a sort of psychic vampire. He was primarily a martial artist type, but could absorb memories and skills to a small extent. However, there was always the risk of a "Psychic short" which could see him saddled with the full psyche of someone he absorbed. He was an extremely effective character, because he could shift from Martial artist to dedicated Mentalist to Science prodigy as needed. Nonethless, keeping the Multiform on the highest point (ie: combat) character prevented him outshining a straight martial artist in combat. Like a multipower, you can flexibility at the cost of a single powerful role.

 

cheers, Mark

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

Not obvious enough, but both Billy Batson and Bruce Banner got attacked often enough.

 

Billy Batson got 'captured in the surprise phase' quite frequently.

 

Bruce Banner avoided turning into the Hulk, and preferred trying to run from combat. The Hulk's enemies tended to either be faster than Bruce Banner or have ranged attacks.

 

I think the solution here is to have Billy Batson/Bruce Banner emulators spend combat time the same way the characters they emulate do, if perhaps more often.

 

I wouldn't say those guys were Multiformers. I'd say they were OIHID types.

[Jhamin]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

I wouldn't say those guys were Multiformers. I'd say they were OIHID types.

 

I agree that Billy was a OHID. I think a much better argument can be made for Banner/The Hulk being different enough from each other that they were a Multiform. (The Hulks grasp of Nuclear Physics was almost as nonexistant as Banner's ablity to take Anti-Tank rounds to the chest)

 

I am really liking the idea of making the player fess up to which one the main character is & building that one to campeign limits. The weaker multiform is a neat side ability, not an excuse for points.

[OddHat]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

My personal prefered "fix" for Multiform was All Forms Pay for any form they could switch into. Ultraman pays for Hayata, and Hayata pays for Ultraman. The Shapechanging Wizard pays for his Shapechange Spell, and each target form pays to switch back to the Wizard.

 

That said, I'm OK with the choice to leave things as they are in 6th. Multiform itself is tricky enough no matter how you price it that you'll generally have to Insert GM Here to prevent abuse, and at least the 6E method has the advantage of simplicity.

[Nolgroth]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

6E1 271

"Because Multiform is Persistent,

a character who’s Stunned or Knocked Out

doesn’t normally revert to his true form."

No offense, but in a thread looking for ways of changing the rules to discourage/prevent abuse, one more proposed change is not out of place.

[Vondy]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

I am comfortable being cast in the role of No Man.

[Ockham's Spoon]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

I have never liked Multiform myself, and try to discourage it where possible through Only in Hero ID and large Multipower's with slots that could only be used in certain combinations (e.g. only the Density Increase and Armor for the rock form, but only Desolid and Flight for the air form).

 

But sometimes Multiform really is the best way to build a character, and in that case I am with OddHat, each form has to pay for the ability to shift to turn into another form. That still means the lowest point form pays the most, but the other forms don't get off for free.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

No offense' date=' but in a thread looking for ways of changing the rules to discourage/prevent abuse, one more proposed change is not out of place. [/quote']

 

Agreed. And I like that suggestion too. In some games and some contexts, I think it will be a great way to balance things. In fantasy settings where it doesn't make sense to have a spell-induced form pay for a Multiform, for example. Non-Persistent and other limitations such as End costs, duration limitations, the risk of personality loss, etc., all might be potential balancers that work when the payment structure change might get too cumbersome or make little sense.

[tesuji]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

No offense' date=' but in a thread looking for ways of changing the rules to discourage/prevent abuse, one more proposed change is not out of place. [/quote']

 

Apparently i misunderstood. i did not read his post as a suggested rules change but as a description of how he thought it worked.

 

As a proposed rule change, I dont get how it solves the problem. it changes the cost for sure - people would need to have the base form pay more for a persistent multiform if the default was non-persistent but that cost is invisible so no problem

 

or is he suggesting disalllowing any persistent multiforms?

 

If thats the suggestion i would say No because that limits too many concepts imo. I prefer to say NO because something is disruptive not because the costing is problematic.

 

I think i will do the following

 

BASE FORM pays as per book

Every other form pays a FORM COST equal to 1/10 the most expensive form PLUS 5 each for multiple forms

 

So assuming 400 pt games

A guy with FOUR 400 pt forms

BASE form has 400 and spend 90 pts 80 for 400 pt forms and +10 for FOUR forms.

Three other forms have 400 pts each and each spend 50 FORM cost. So they are "effectively" 350 pt characters.

 

So taking out for MF spends, he is playing a base form with 310 and three alternates with 350 each in a 400 pt game.

 

Lims can reduce cost etc.

 

I mean you could also say "all MF have an 11- activation" and let that shuffle them into true form at certain times but again that limits the concepts to those which fit.

 

I mean, your typical werewolf doesn't pop back to human when he gets kncoed hard upside the head, does he?

 

My goal would not be to try anf force the character into true form any more than his concept woul suggest - I dont want to force anything - just have the system accurately cost the benefits whatever the design calls for.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

The analogy with MultiPower is pretty easy to see. For the same 60 points:

 

PC1 has a single 60-point power

 

PC2 has a 50-point MultiPower with two fixed slots

 

PC3 has a 40-point MultiPower with five fixed slots

 

So there's a fair trade-off between raw power and flexibility.

 

But with MultiForm, there is no such trade-off:

 

PC4 is a 400-point character

 

PC5 is a 400-point character who has spent 80 points on another 400-point form

 

PC5 now has 320 points worth of stuff that he has access to that the PC4 does not, and has paid the same amount.

 

PC6 is a 400-point character who has spend 90 points on four additional 400-point forms

 

PC6 now has access to 1510 points worth of stuff (400 or 310 at a time) for no greater cost than PC4 paid for his one form. Lots of flexibility for no trade-off at all.

 

Using the house rule that all forms pay for the MultiForm puts that trade-off in. With such a rule, PC5 has essentially two 320-point forms, and PC6 has five 310-point forms. So there's a trade-off of raw power for flexibility. This is as it should be.

 

Slightly off-topic: The +5 adder for double the forms is a slight problem as it's not that much of a trade-off (IMO) for the added forms. In the example PC6 only gave up 10 points for three more forms. I would suggest maybe a +1/4

Advantage for each doubling instead. That way the extra cost reflects the power of the forms. So each of PC6's forms would pay 120 points (instead of 90), and he'd have a net result of five 280-point forms.

 

The only issue that leaves (for me) is that extra forms still cost the same even if they are fewer points. Why would anyone with a 400-point extra form buy more forms that aren't 400 points also? If they're only 300 or 200 or 100-point forms they cost the same. Yes, yes, I know "concept" but that's not a sufficient argument, because peoples' concepts will change to use the rules most effectively. "It's not in concept for my mouse form to have 400 points, so I'll change the concept to a Mighty Mouse form." I have some ideas on how to deal with this, which I'm not entirely satisfied with, and they're even further off-topic for this thread.

[ghost-angel]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

My rule on this is pretty simple, and seems perfectly fair to me.

 

Every form pays for multiform as if that form were the base form.

 

Example 1:

Robot Boy has two forms. His base form is a 150pt normal, and his second form is a 350pt Living Robot (Robot Robot). His normal form pays 70pts for multiform, and his Living Robot form pays 30pts.

 

Example 2:

The Mammal has five forms. He has a 200pt normal form, a 150pt ferret form, a 300pt cougar form, a 250pt horse form, and a 350pt elephant form. All the forms except for the elephant form pay 80pts (350/5 +10). The elephant form pays 70pts (300/5 +10).

 

I have considered going to a version where each form only pays the points for the forms that it can directly shift to. In that case, if the Mammal could had to go through human form to shift to a different animal, then each form, other than human, would just pay 40pts to shift to human, and the human form would pay 80 for access to all forms.

 

How do you handle it in a Campaign where you don't buy Powers, like a Fantasy Campaign where a character finds an Amulet Of Dragon Form; and you still need the Real Points of the construct because you've also used the Resource Points from Dark Champions.

[tesuji]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

 

The only issue that leaves (for me) is that extra forms still cost the same even if they are fewer points. Why would anyone with a 400-point extra form buy more forms that aren't 400 points also? If they're only 300 or 200 or 100-point forms they cost the same. Yes, yes, I know "concept" but that's not a sufficient argument, because peoples' concepts will change to use the rules most effectively. "It's not in concept for my mouse form to have 400 points, so I'll change the concept to a Mighty Mouse form." I have some ideas on how to deal with this, which I'm not entirely satisfied with, and they're even further off-topic for this thread.

 

for my way of thinking the issue is a non-problem.

 

balance-wise a guy with a 200 pt form a 400 pt form and a 300 pt form is not noticeably worse off than a guy with all 400 pt forms.

 

You do not control how often he goes into which form.

 

if the 200 pt form is a good science guy, say computer guy, then MOSTLY that form will be used when they need compuiters and his lack of combat isn't NORMALLY going to be a problem.

 

he will dial in the 400 pt monster when fighting starts.

 

So if you start with the assumption that "the guy will use the best form at a given moment for what he needs" then the big element of cost is "whats the biggest form".

 

If as Gm i start giving point breaks for "some of my forms are weaker than their max" then i think i am obliging myself to stick it to those forms. I am now being paid to get those forms weakness into play. On the other hand, if i just leave it as a concept/sfx then i am not going to be WORKIBNG towards sticking the guys weaker forms into situations. i am fine to just let him choose forms and not force the situation - "we need you to bring up geek boy while we hold of mechanon"

 

Of course there might be one easy way to do this.

 

The pt total times number of forms is a TOTAL not discrete blocks.

 

So if you pay 80 for multiform for 400 pt forms and pay +10 for four such forms, you have 1600 pts to spend and that can be four 400 pt characters or it can be a 400 two 300s and four 150s.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

Of course there might be one easy way to do this.

 

The pt total times number of forms is a TOTAL not discrete blocks.

 

So if you pay 80 for multiform for 400 pt forms and pay +10 for four such forms, you have 1600 pts to spend and that can be four 400 pt characters or it can be a 400 two 300s and four 150s.

 

That's a neat idea!

[Nolgroth]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

Apparently i misunderstood. i did not read his post as a suggested rules change but as a description of how he thought it worked.

 

As a proposed rule change, I dont get how it solves the problem. it changes the cost for sure - people would need to have the base form pay more for a persistent multiform if the default was non-persistent but that cost is invisible so no problem

 

or is he suggesting disalllowing any persistent multiforms?

If "he" means me, what I am suggesting is that none of the forms are inherently persistent. The base form pays for multipower and if any of the forms gets knocked out, then the character reverts to the base. In that case, would having a weak base form then be something any sane player would want?

 

If, for example, a player wants to play a werewolf with three forms (man, wolf, hybrid). He decides to get sneaky and build the human as the base form and does little more than a PS and a skill or two to reflect the human's profession and hobby. That's all fine and great until some lucky schlub drops him with a mighty attack. Now, unconscious, the character reverts to his completely powerless form.

 

On the other hand, if the player builds his werewolf with the hybrid or wolf form as the base, if he gets knocked unconscious it is a stronger form he reverts to. Also might add some interesting role-playing moments when he gets knocked out and then reverts to a wolf or hybrid man-wolf form.

 

Admittedly, this is a partial solution. It requires the GM to adjudicate adding Persistent or Instant Change. Either of those sort of blows the whole theory out of the water.

 

I sort of dislike the idea if each form paying the whole cost for the multiform. Maybe the cost could be shared between the forms. A side effect of that would be to encourage more forms so you get "more for the money." Not sure if that is good or bad.

[tesuji]

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated....

 

If, for example, a player wants to play a werewolf with three forms (man, wolf, hybrid). He decides to get sneaky and build the human as the base form and does little more than a PS and a skill or two to reflect the human's profession and hobby. That's all fine and great until some lucky schlub drops him with a mighty attack. Now, unconscious, the character reverts to his completely powerless form.

.

 

i get it but two things...

 

first werewolves do not typically swap back to human when stunned. they swap back when killed or when circumstances change.

 

so are you suggesting disallowing those concepts because the rule cost is faulty?

 

if you want to allow them to add persistent for proper concepts, then you are right back to the problem because the higher multiform cost is invisible.

 

i would mich prefer a useable and meaningful cost structure that lets me say yes to those characters to one which forces me to say no to them.

 

as i suggested above make each sub-form pay a slot cost, 1/10 plus adders for multiples. that amounts to roughyl half the multiform full cost paid by the base form.

 

with that i am not putting myself in the role of policing their forms, worrying about forcing them into this form or that form, and can just leave them to play their character. just like the mpower guy runs his four ebs.