Multipower imbalance

[Shiva13]

I'm coming from a 5th Edition Revised direction in posting this. So bear with me.

 

The Multipower itself I believe has been broken since its basic conception long ago in the 1st edition of the game. let me break it down for you.

 

The Multipower has a pool of points that determines the active points any considered inside of the Multipower can be based upon. This locks in a set of groundrules that the slots of the Multipower has to follow. This we know. But the slots themselves provide an outrageous benefit for the small inconvenience of not being able to use all of the powers in the Multipower at full power all at once.

 

A variable slot is the equivilent to a -4 limitation applied to the slot. A fixed slot is equivilent to a -9 limitation applied to the slot. Outrageous, to my mind, to say the least.

 

Now let's look at the Multipower's bigger brother for a second. The Variable Power Pool. The VPP requires not only buying the pool of points, but a control cost equal to half that pool. Basically a manditory +1/2 Advantage. Which isn't really unreasonable at all. It's the price for the versitility granted. But it also gives us a number we could use as a comparison for adjusting the costs of the Multipower slots.

 

I propose that if one changed a variable slot of a Mulipower to a -1/2 Limitation, and a fixed slot to a -1 limitation applied to each slot of the Multipower, you end up with a far more fair costing for the benefits that being a slot in a Multipower grants.

 

So Steve, what do you think? An I off-base?

[Steve Long]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I think you're posting a Discussion topic (that I'm not going to comment on in any event) in the Rules forum, so I've moved it.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I'm coming from a 5th Edition Revised direction in posting this. So bear with me.

 

The Multipower itself I believe has been broken since its basic conception long ago in the 1st edition of the game. let me break it down for you.

 

The Multipower has a pool of points that determines the active points any considered inside of the Multipower can be based upon. This locks in a set of groundrules that the slots of the Multipower has to follow. This we know. But the slots themselves provide an outrageous benefit for the small inconvenience of not being able to use all of the powers in the Multipower at full power all at once.

 

A variable slot is the equivilent to a -4 limitation applied to the slot. A fixed slot is equivilent to a -9 limitation applied to the slot. Outrageous, to my mind, to say the least.

 

Now let's look at the Multipower's bigger brother for a second. The Variable Power Pool. The VPP requires not only buying the pool of points, but a control cost equal to half that pool. Basically a manditory +1/2 Advantage. Which isn't really unreasonable at all. It's the price for the versitility granted. But it also gives us a number we could use as a comparison for adjusting the costs of the Multipower slots.

 

I propose that if one changed a variable slot of a Mulipower to a -1/2 Limitation, and a fixed slot to a -1 limitation applied to each slot of the Multipower, you end up with a far more fair costing for the benefits that being a slot in a Multipower grants.

 

So Steve, what do you think? An I off-base?

 

I think Multipowers are one of the best spot-on costing structures

in the game. Not too expensive or cheap.

 

See this old post of mine for further analysis which also includes Variable Advantage.

[tesuji]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

dirst to the op you cannot take two data points and show "one is too cheap".

 

given your analysis one might also conclude just as reasonably that vpp is too expensive.

 

however in fact a mp works if applied a certain way. As i have argued before, if a mp is used to combine powers that are never used together, then it is potentially imbalancing. this is now even brought up in the rulebook in 6e where the gm is cautioned against allowing mp of non-combat powers where using them only one at a time is meaningless. its like trying to put lockout on your healing touch because it cannot be used when you fire your firebolt. no go!

 

When used on powers that one would normally like to use together, like say an eb and an rka, then the mp creates the effect of being a discount for flavor. A guy with a 12d6 eb and a 4d6 rka has two equally effective powers and if they are in a mp then i can choose which flavor i want. but i cannot combine them into one massive attack. that costs just 20% more than having only one attack. thats about right.

 

if i made you pay full price then you could combine them together at once for a masive attack or you could pay the same price for one 24 dice attack.

 

so mp do the job of providing alternative attacks for a reasonable cost.

 

but the problem comes when the mp becomes a catch all and is used for a lot of powers many of which were never to be used together. then you can have problems of balance.

 

Magic multipowers where the only unifying element is "its magic" are frequent violators.

 

before allowing a power into a mp ask "is not using the other powers while using this actually going to matter?"

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I'm coming from a 5th Edition Revised direction in posting this. So bear with me.

 

The Multipower itself I believe has been broken since its basic conception long ago in the 1st edition of the game. let me break it down for you.

 

The Multipower has a pool of points that determines the active points any considered inside of the Multipower can be based upon. This locks in a set of groundrules that the slots of the Multipower has to follow. This we know. But the slots themselves provide an outrageous benefit for the small inconvenience of not being able to use all of the powers in the Multipower at full power all at once.

 

A variable slot is the equivilent to a -4 limitation applied to the slot. A fixed slot is equivilent to a -9 limitation applied to the slot. Outrageous, to my mind, to say the least.

 

Now let's look at the Multipower's bigger brother for a second. The Variable Power Pool. The VPP requires not only buying the pool of points, but a control cost equal to half that pool. Basically a manditory +1/2 Advantage. Which isn't really unreasonable at all. It's the price for the versitility granted. But it also gives us a number we could use as a comparison for adjusting the costs of the Multipower slots.

 

I propose that if one changed a variable slot of a Mulipower to a -1/2 Limitation, and a fixed slot to a -1 limitation applied to each slot of the Multipower, you end up with a far more fair costing for the benefits that being a slot in a Multipower grants.

 

So Steve, what do you think? An I off-base?

 

I'm not Steve. I think you're off base. I would suggest Steve also thinks you are off base or he would have changed the pricing.

 

If you want a VPP that equates to a Multipower of unlimited slots, you dn't pay 60 for the pool and 30 for the control cost. The pool must change without a roll (+1) and as a 0 phase action (+1) for a cost of 60 for the pool and 90 for the control cost.

 

A Multipower wiith a 60 point pool can buy 15 fixed slots (6 points each) or 7.5 variable slots (12 points each) for the same cost as that VPP.

 

If we apply your approach, a Variable slot costs 40 points, and a fixed slot costs 30 points. I can have a Multipower with all of three fixed slots, or just over 2 variable slots, under your model. Why would anyone buy a Multipower under that pricing structure?

[Zephrosyne]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I think that Multipowers are ok except when they are allowed to be overly broad. Special effects such as "magic" and "cosmic" have been used to justify putting half the rule book into a Multipower (based on my experience). However, when you use special effects such as "gravity," "fire," "brick tricks," etc. it is not nearly as egregious in my opinion. I think Multipower is just one of those mechanics where the gm has to willing to put his foot down.

 

For the record, I do think Variable Power Pools are too cheap;).

[Nevenall]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

There's a paragraph in 6E1 that warns GMs to watch out for Multipowers full of non-combat oriented powers because that gives great benefit without any hindrance.

You just need to watch for those kinds of multipowers rather then remove or recost them. In my opinion.

[Rapier]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

There's a paragraph in 6E1 that warns GMs to watch out for Multipowers full of non-combat oriented powers because that gives great benefit without any hindrance.

You just need to watch for those kinds of multipowers rather then remove or recost them. In my opinion.

 

Believe it or not, I have (once or twice) in my past been known to Munchkin. It happens. I've mostly gotten over it.

 

I think it is kind of funny, though. A year ago is someone had brought to me a character with an MP that contained a bunch of non-combat powers I wouldn't have looked twice. Steve points out that this isn't much of a limitation for the utility and you go 'ohhhhhh, yeah.'

 

I've never done NonCombat Powers in an MP. I've always limited MPs to attack and defense.

 

But even now, I'm trying hard to come up with a likely MP that would contain 'noncombat powers.' Oh, I'm sure they are out there and I'm sure we could jam this thread with examples (totally unnecessary, btw). I'm just saying that the 'noncombat MP' would stick out enough that I'd think it would kind of stand up and say 'AHEM!' when brought to you.

 

Also, I would like to mention that an exception would need to be noted that a FH magic MP would be exempted from this rule. The FH MP Magic Pool is intended to significantly reduce the cost for spells for a low-point FH campaign.

[torchwolf]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

In 4th, 5th and 6th Edition, Powers have been noted with caution signs (meaning possibly overly effective) or stop signs (meaning possibly detrimental to scenarios or extremely effective).

All of the Frameworks had those: Elemental Control and Multipower had a caution sign, and Variable Power Pool had a stop sign. This means that the GM should consider if these should be allowed in his campaign – in many (in particular Fantasy Hero) campaigns, this might be especially appropriate.

 

Of these Frameworks, both Multipower and Elemental Control essentially functioned as cost break constructs. They do not have a game function in themselves; they are just costing structures. Some game mechanics apply differently to MP and EC, but the possibly limitations for each individual slot in an EC or MP had little relation to how much they are really worth, cost-wise.

 

EC: This was removed in 6E, and the Unified Power (-1/4) Limitation replaced it; the cost break for related Powers is not really worth more.

 

MP: Fixed slots can be simulated with “Lockout” (-1/2). “Half Positive Effect from Adjustment Powers” (-1/4) might be applied (although this gets proportionally less of an effect the more slots the MP has). Some MPs structures can be replaced with Unified Power (-1/4), although in case of say a utility belt MP, this doesn't necessarily make sense. All in all, barring some other Limitations that might be applicable, that adds up to (-1), which is quite different from the actual cost break in MPs with many slots. Of course, these mentioned Limitations could also usually be taken on some (not all) actual MP slots, bringing the slot cost down even further.

 

Even if I have not had much problem with these in my campaigns, Shiva obviously has had issues with these cost breaks. The values of Advantages and Limitations can be discussed ad nauseum, but the cost breaks in Frameworks are an issue that concerns a particular GM and his players, which means neither of the Frameworks may be appropriate for a certain campaign, and, if so, how to keep the functionality of a framework if it is removed, was what was originally discussed here (much of this discussion has occurred in the chat function). The suggested values instead of the existing ones in MP was one suggestion, simply dropping the entire MP framework was another. There is no right or wrong answer to if any of the frameworks function well in a certain campaign. Changing the cost break or dropping MP altogether are reasonable solutions to address cost imbalance issues in a campaign – the caution sign is there to point this out in the rules, and has been since the 4th Edition.

 

I'm not taking any universal stand on the be-or-not-to-be of MP, I'm suggesting that if it causes serious problems of any kind whatsoever, it changes nothing in how the rules function if you just ban it, just the same as the EC.

 

YMMV.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

But even now' date=' I'm trying hard to come up with a likely MP that would contain 'noncombat powers.' Oh, I'm sure they are out there and I'm sure we could jam this thread with examples (totally unnecessary, btw). I'm just saying that the 'noncombat MP' would stick out enough that I'd think it would kind of stand up and say 'AHEM!' when brought to you.[/quote']

 

"Utility Belt" comes to mind.

[Ice9]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Actually, I'm in favor of even the non-combat Multipower. I think they're costed correctly, by the principle that you shouldn't have to pay out the ass for versatility. Being able to use any of five 30p powers is not generally as powerful as being able to use one 150p power - and that applies in combat or out of it.

 

Let's say Multipower didn't exist: take two psychic detectives. One of them has an array of fairly low-strength powers - empathic telepathy (senses only emotions), limited object-reading, dowsing, maybe some enhanced tarot. Could be appropriate for a Dark Champions game. The other takes the same amount of points and buys a huge-ass Telepathy power. He can, just by glancing at someone, read their entire memories without them noticing. Now is that balanced? Hell no. Versatility is worth something, but not the entire sum - and Multipower is the right balance point.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

"Utility Belt" comes to mind.

 

Except a good Utility Belt is usually better represented by a VPP instead.

[tesuji]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

 

For the record, I do think Variable Power Pools are too cheap;).

 

for the record i think vpps are appropriately priced, or think they were. i have no practical experience yet with the new vpp pricing in actual play.

 

however, some vpp i have found inappropriate for pcs.

 

best real play example was a magic vpp which grew onto a character who started with a broad magic mp.

 

problem wasn't cost vs power. he proved no more effective in combat than the others.

 

problem was everything else non-combat.

 

want to scout ahead? send in tigerman? no wait instead give mr wizard a minute to dial up a 60 pt clairvoy or a 60 pt invisibility...

 

want to ge tto new york quick? have mr gadgeteer warm up his quinjet. no wait let mr wizard dial up a mass megaflight spell.

 

he became the one stop answer guy for nearly any non-combat task and basic shat all over every other characters secondary schtick again and again.

 

it wasn't him doing it. they asked him to.

 

 

but it was just not fun.

 

so now i insist on significant lims on vpps.

 

if the vpp is broad enough to be a problem there have to be significant access lims so that using the guys who can do this is preferable... so you only rely on the vpp when you have no other option.

 

otherwise if the vpp is quick and easy to access, it has to be very limited in scope, so it wont be stomping everyone else's schtick.

 

thats to be approved for a pc, of course.

[Utech]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

On utility belts...

 

Guess I've never understood using a multipower for the utility belts.

 

Aquaman: "Batman! I'm so glad to see you! We can still save the world. First we need your bat-rope to tie the MacGuffin device over the pool of acid. Unfortunately, that'll put all the lights out. So we'll need your nightvision goggles. Then you'll need to use your little laser torch to cut this circuit here exactly at the moment the MacGuffin's "ready" indicator indicates that it's ready-"

 

Batman: "Er- Sorry, Aquaman. I can't do all that."

 

Aquaman: "What?"

 

Batman: "Yes. Well, you see, I can't use all three of those things at the same time."

 

Aquaman: "Why in the world not?"

 

Batman: "Yes, well, I know it makes no sense at all. I mean I've got all these things on my utility belt. You'd think that I could just unhook all of them and use them all at once... But I can't. Call it a psychological block. Did I ever tell you how my parents were gunned down in front of me in Crime Alley?"

 

Aquaman: "But... The world..."

[Rapier]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

"Utility Belt" comes to mind.

 

Even then some of the juicey Utility Belt commons are Smoke Pellets (ie Darkness), Flash Grenades (ie Sight Flash) and Swing Lines (ie Swinging).

 

All of which have a fair amount of combat utility.

 

I don't think that any particular power can be labelled Combat or NonCombat. I think that all powers have a combat and noncombat potential. It is the build and design that would label a power as combat or noncombat.

 

One would say, without thought, that Blast is a combat power. However, if I add Extra Time: 1 Week, RSR: Ritual Magic, OAF: Hair or Nail Clippings that same Blast is now not useful, at all, for combat.

 

One of the few things I can see as having the highest potential of being little or no use during combat are a number of skills (and their appropriate levels - eg LockPicks) and many of the Perks and Talents. If someone brings me an MP with Bump of Direction, Speed Reading, Cramming, Universal Translator and +3 LockPicking, they are going to have to do some real fast talking.

 

And I think that is what I'm really trying to say (in my normal roundabout manner). A NonCombat MP is going to look fairly odd from conception.

[Rapier]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

On utility belts...

 

Guess I've never understood using a multipower for the utility belts.

 

Aquaman: "Batman! I'm so glad to see you! We can still save the world. First we need your bat-rope to tie the MacGuffin device over the pool of acid. Unfortunately, that'll put all the lights out. So we'll need your nightvision goggles. Then you'll need to use your little laser torch to cut this circuit here exactly at the moment the MacGuffin's "ready" indicator indicates that it's ready-"

 

Batman: "Er- Sorry, Aquaman. I can't do all that."

 

Aquaman: "What?"

 

Batman: "Yes. Well, you see, I can't use all three of those things at the same time."

 

Aquaman: "Why in the world not?"

 

Batman: "Yes, well, I know it makes no sense at all. I mean I've got all these things on my utility belt. You'd think that I could just unhook all of them and use them all at once... But I can't. Call it a psychological block. Did I ever tell you how my parents were gunned down in front of me in Crime Alley?"

 

Aquaman: "But... The world..."

 

I know a lot of that has been mitigated over the years by rulings about what happens when you change the allocation of a multipower. Some powers immediately dissipate and others don't.

 

At the same time, I would like to think that dramatic license would also compensate. The rules are not meant to be inviolate.

 

I can't see any reason why a 'real' rope would disappear the minute I switched slots in my multipower.

 

I'm also not saying that it might be inappropriate in such cases to alter the cost of the slot with an advantage.

 

I'm not quite sure where I would come down on this particular call. Off the top of my head, if we were sitting at the table, I would allow Bat's rope to remain even after he switched slots. I might, at a later date, change my mind or the build if it keeps happening and appears to be having a larger impact on the game than its cost.

[tesuji]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

i dont see the difference.

 

both vpp and mp have a pool which limits the number of slots that can ve active. if i want a mp able to run three slots at once i just need a big enough pool. both vpp and mp can run into "i have to cut off one to get another" issues.

 

the math is a little different but the problem ramins the same. i often build mp to be able to run three powers out of many at once.

 

particularly i have seen several utility belts wirtten up as only change in lab, representing loading the poches before heading out.

 

these seem to be cosmic utility belts which somehow teleport in whatever you need however, which i have not seen used in my games.

[Kristopher]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I'm coming from a 5th Edition Revised direction in posting this. So bear with me.

 

The Multipower itself I believe has been broken since its basic conception long ago in the 1st edition of the game. let me break it down for you.

 

The Multipower has a pool of points that determines the active points any considered inside of the Multipower can be based upon. This locks in a set of groundrules that the slots of the Multipower has to follow. This we know. But the slots themselves provide an outrageous benefit for the small inconvenience of not being able to use all of the powers in the Multipower at full power all at once.

 

A variable slot is the equivilent to a -4 limitation applied to the slot. A fixed slot is equivilent to a -9 limitation applied to the slot. Outrageous, to my mind, to say the least.

 

Now let's look at the Multipower's bigger brother for a second. The Variable Power Pool. The VPP requires not only buying the pool of points, but a control cost equal to half that pool. Basically a manditory +1/2 Advantage. Which isn't really unreasonable at all. It's the price for the versitility granted. But it also gives us a number we could use as a comparison for adjusting the costs of the Multipower slots.

 

I propose that if one changed a variable slot of a Mulipower to a -1/2 Limitation, and a fixed slot to a -1 limitation applied to each slot of the Multipower, you end up with a far more fair costing for the benefits that being a slot in a Multipower grants.

 

So Steve, what do you think? An I off-base?

 

I am not Steve, but... Yes. You are.

 

The problem is that you're looking at the MP as a list of powers with a big discount on each power. That's not what an MP is.

 

An MP is a power -- a single power -- and you pay extra for each slot in order to use variations of that power. An MP with a single fixed slot costs 10% more than the same power by itself, and you get nothing for it. An MP with two fixed slots costs 20% more than the pool itself, and you've just started to get some utility out of those extra points you've spent. Etc, until you reach 50% extra at 5 slots.

 

As it stands, an MP with 5 ultra/fixed slots is exactly as expensive as a VPP of the same size with no modifiers. The MP is easier to switch around, the VPP is more versatile. For the same cost, the VPP can do anything that fits inside the concept and SFX -- anything.

 

Never mind that an MP with 5 variable slots costs significantly more than the VPP.

 

Under your proposal, instead of an MP, you'd have a list of Powers (each with a Limitation) that would quickly become far more expensive than a VPP with the same size pool as one of the powers, or the original MP itself.

[torchwolf]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I think Multipowers are one of the best spot-on costing structures

in the game. Not too expensive or cheap.

 

See this old post of mine for further analysis which also includes Variable Advantage.

 

Kudos for that.

Good analysis and comparison. Crunching these numbers and thinking about the OP issue, I'm going to make some assumptions and suggestions - please crush these if they are ill-conceived:

 

1) There is obviously potential for abuse of VPP and MP, and from the analysis above it seems the issue would occur most frequently either with heavily limited Powers in VPP or with MPs with more than a certain number of slots.

 

2) VPP has been reworked in 6E - the maximum active points and the maximum real points are now purchased separately, so abuse can be minimized by limiting the maximum real points to, for example, 25% or 50% of the maximum active points. If the potential for abuse if great, even 10% might be considered but that may be too limiting for many concepts (such as the utility belt examples).

 

3) MPs that have 5-6 or more slots may end up being too much of "dial-a-power" constructs. Limiting the number of slots may lessen this issue, avoiding the need to ban the MP framework entirely. Limiting by sfx only may still be abusive in some cases, if players rationalize their concepts too much (i.e. pseudo-munchkin concepts).

 

4) There are almost certainly Advantages like Variable Advantage or Variable Special Effect that would constitute another possible way to build Powers that fulfill much of the role of either a VPP or MP, so another road could be to disallow VPPs or MPs that can be built in another manner.

 

Hope this is useful?

[Duke Bushido]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

But even now, I'm trying hard to come up with a likely MP that would contain 'noncombat powers.'

 

Over the years, a lot of Power Suits in my group like Senses and Movement multipowers. You know: switch from Flight to Swimming to Tunneling, that sort of thing.

 

Justified reasonably well, and not abusing the cost savings, I don't mind it too much.

 

I've never liked a "Drain / Aid" set up much, but again: if it's not particularly abusive (say, the player builds and opts to use his savings to avoid an additional Disadvantage instead of being able to pile in more dice) I'll let it slide.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Technically, Senses are considered Special Powers and are not allowed within Frameworks of any sort without GM permission.

[Naanomi]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

One benefit of MP over VPP is that of AP limits... in a 60 AP campaign, I can have a MP with a bunch of 60 point powers in it... a huge number of 60 point powers if I need to. I have a character with about 30 variations of Aid/Heal powers in her MP.

 

Switching to a VPP might save on book keeping, but a 60 AP VPP cannot have a 60 AP power put in it. For versatility I lose on raw power.

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

Even then some of the juicey Utility Belt commons are Smoke Pellets (ie Darkness), Flash Grenades (ie Sight Flash) and Swing Lines (ie Swinging).

 

All of which have a fair amount of combat utility.

 

I don't think that any particular power can be labelled Combat or NonCombat. I think that all powers have a combat and noncombat potential. It is the build and design tt.hat would label a power as combat or noncombat.

 

The Utility Belt will presumably also have a number of noncombat applications. Or, if the character is combat-focused, it may no

 

One of the few things I can see as having the highest potential of being little or no use during combat are a number of skills (and their appropriate levels - eg LockPicks) and many of the Perks and Talents. If someone brings me an MP with Bump of Direction, Speed Reading, Cramming, Universal Translator and +3 LockPicking, they are going to have to do some real fast talking.

 

And I think that is what I'm really trying to say (in my normal roundabout manner). A NonCombat MP is going to look fairly odd from conception.

 

Hmmm...can't my Utility Belt have:

 

- A compass (Bump of Direction)

- a scanner with a link to the BatComputer for analysis of text (Speed Reading)

- a portable computer programmed with some skill basics (Cramming)

- a link to the BatComputer for linguistics (Universal Translator)

- electronic lockpicks (+3 lockpicking)

 

None of those look at all odd viewed in that light.

 

One benefit of MP over VPP is that of AP limits... in a 60 AP campaign, I can have a MP with a bunch of 60 point powers in it... a huge number of 60 point powers if I need to. I have a character with about 30 variations of Aid/Heal powers in her MP.

 

Switching to a VPP might save on book keeping, but a 60 AP VPP cannot have a 60 AP power put in it. For versatility I lose on raw power.

 

?? If a 60 AP VPP has a 40 point pool and a 20 point control cost (which is what I assume you are implying), why would a 60 point Multipower with 30 Ultra slots not be a 240 AP power? I'd allow the VPP to have 60 AP powers if I were allowing the MP to have 60 AP powers.

 

Yet another reason AP limits are not a rule of the game, I suppose.

[Naanomi]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

?? If a 60 AP VPP has a 40 point pool and a 20 point control cost (which is what I assume you are implying), why would a 60 point Multipower with 30 Ultra slots not be a 240 AP power? I'd allow the VPP to have 60 AP powers if I were allowing the MP to have 60 AP powers.

 

Yet another reason AP limits are not a rule of the game, I suppose.

 

I would too, but by 'the rules' that is not the case... the MP does not add up to one big power, but the control cost is part of the AP of the VPP.

[Hyper-Man]

Re: Multipower imbalance

 

I would too' date=' but by 'the rules' that is not the case... the MP does not add up to one big power, but the control cost is part of the AP of the VPP.[/quote']

 

Again...

Huh??

 

Multipowers and VPP's are just frameworks.

 

Active Point caps (which are house rules anyway) only deal with powers (not the frameworks they might be built inside of).