Kelvin

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated.... Hello prestidigitator,

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated.... Here's another Multiform concept, based loosely on VPP, and tesuji's suggestion earlier in the thread. Like the multipower-derived concept I described earlier, this concept treads Multiform as "character framework" using a "meta-character-sheet." The forms themselves do not buy Multiform. The player pays for Multiform on the "meta-sheet" using only campaign starting points, and earned experience. In this version, I didn't require the player to pay for the privilege of taking disadvantages (that might be necessary for point balance, but this concept isn't 'finished' enough for such a detail to matter). Multiform Pool: Multiform Base Pool The number of Base Pool points determines the maximum number of multiform pool points that can be spent on a single form. 1 real point per Base Pool point. Advantage: Pool Multiplier This advantage applied to the Multiform Base Pool multiplies the total pool points to be distributed among all forms, but does not increase the maximum number of pool points that can be spent on a single form. +1/4 = Pool Point = Base Pool Points x2 +1/2 = Pool Point = Base Pool Points x4 +3/4 = Pool Point = Base Pool Points x8 etc. Still using 4th Ed superheroic (100 base + 150 disads = 250 total) for my examples: Graymalkin, a wizard who can turn into a panther. 100 Multiform Base Pool of 80 with x2 Pool Multiplier (+1/4) Max 80 points per form, 160 points for all forms Pool Usage: 80 Wizard Form (starts with 80 base points; +150 disads would be 230) 80 Panther Form (starts with 80 base points; +150 disads would be 230) This seems under-costed (2 forms for only an 8% overhead?), but a little tuning could fix that in the absence of some glaring loophole. This structure should make the purchase of "variable size forms" cost effective, and makes it relatively inexpensive to have a lot of forms (especially cheap ones). To mimic some of the 5th ed looseness, allow Multiform-specific limitations to be applied to the pool cost of forms, taking advantage of the specification that the Base Pool size limits only the maximum 'pool points spent' per form - not the actual base points of the form. The Red Mage is a wizard with a fearsome dragon form that he can only call upon once per day: Red Mage 100 Multiform Base Pool of 80 with x2 Pool Multiplier (+1/4) Max 80 points per form, 160 points for all forms Pool Usage: 80 Mage Form with 80 base points; 150 disads would raise to 230) 80 Dragon Form with 180 base points (1 charge continues 1 turn, -1 1/4), 150 disads would raise to 330. I only showed configurations with two forms, but the idea is that any number of forms could be put in the pool, until you run out of pool points.

Re: Multiform for Free? Frustrated.... Multiform is an interesting power in that it has had 3 different implementations, none of them entirely satisfactory. Several proposals earlier in the thread are reminiscent of Multiform as originally introduced in "Champions III": All forms pay 1/10 of the total cost (excluding the multiform cost itself) for all forms. Complicated enough at the beginning, the math resulted in a maintenence nightmare as experience points were added to the character. The last time I spent some concentrated time thinking about this (years ago), I concluded that the only "clean" way to implement Multiform was to declare it to be a "character framework" instead of a sort of power framework (I know, technically it's a power today) -- and maintain a completely separate "multiform character sheet". Back in those 4th edition Champions days, I worked up a version with a cost structure derived from multipower. Revised Multiform: The Experience Reserve works just like the point reserve in a Multipower: It can be shared among all your forms. It represents the maximum total free points (Base Points + Experience) that is available to each Multiform slot. The slots work only slightly differently than a Multipower. For each form, you must pay 1/10 the maximum total points (including disadvantages) that the form can have. Up to that maximum, the form can get free points equal to the Experience Reserve. Once you use up the points in the reserve, you can start taking Disadvantages as long as your (total cost)/10 doesn't exceed the slot cost. Of course, just like any other character, the Game Master has the final say on the maximum total cost, and maximum points from Disadvantages. Example: Greymalkin, a wizard who can assume the form of a panther, is a starting character in a 100(base)+150(disads) superheroic campaign.. Since he has no experience (yet), he has only 100 points to spend on his Multiform. 60 Multiform Experience Reserve 20 Wizard form, up to 205 points total (60 free, 145 from disadvantages) 20 Panther form, up to 205 points total (60 free, 145 from disadvantages) Greymalkin's two forms each have 60 free points, and can raise their total cost to 205 with disadvantages. Experience points get spent on the worksheet rather than on the characters directly. I was ultimately dissatisfied with this because like multipowers generally, it favors slots with similar costs. (You can buy a slot to less than it's reserve points, but the savings are miniscule.) I wanted a structure that would encourage creatively different forms. It also seemed more expensive than it should be if you wanted to have many forms (a la "animal man"). So I worked up a VPP equivalent that would allow infinite forms -- but this had the problem that there was no benefit (mechanically) from building a form to anything less that the maximum power. Even though I haven't played in some years, Multiform still tantalizes me with the notion that there is an elegant solution to be found.

Re: Inherent, does anyone use it? How? This is exactly what I was thinking as I read the thread up to this point. Taken to the extreme, we could have the following initial conditions: Endures all environments Possesses all senses Possesses no physical characteristics I.e. a "cosmic" being, indestructable and and pseudo-omniscient, but unable to affect the game world in any way -- strictly an observer. Then you take "disadvantages" like needing to breathe (or not being able to see the future), to pay for having the ability to interact with the game world (including buying physical characteristics) This would be sort of like the Daniel Jackson's dilemma on Stargate (he achieves an "ascended" state, but as an "ascended" being he's not permitted to interfere with the world, even to save it. He has trouble with this restriction, and opts to "de-ascend".) However, I can't imagine how one could reasonably point-balance such an approach, or what practical purpose it would serve. Sure, you might theoretically be able to harmonize the human vs. automaton template vs. sentient rock template, but does this make the game more playable? I like the practical examples Keith Curtis gave for resolving resolving apparent conflicts -- it seems most of these cases are more apparent than actual. Such conflict resolutions put a burden on the GM to define the game world. Of course, this probably helps the campaign more than it hurts the GM. A clear sense of the game world keeps the campaign itself from seeming generic -- in spite of the system being generic. I wish I had understood this better back when I was actually playing.... -- Scott

Re: How far can a telekinetic throw himself? I don't think it's been mentioned in this thread yet, but there's another good reason why TK shouldn't imply flight -- There's plenty of telekinetics in movies and TV that can't fly (I don't think Sue Storm can, either). Making TK and flight separate powers makes a clean build system -- you don't have to slap "not for flight" limits on the TK for these characters, and suffer having a higher active point cost. On a side note, the old rules didn't even allow you to punch directly with TK -- if you wanted that, you had to buy an EB with a TK special effect. I didn't like that at the time, but I've come around toward that point of view since. -- Scott

Re: Help: Sniper Syndrome

Re: Question on flight and telekinesis This is how I have always interpreted the rule as well. The FAQ seems to say differently because of the "just like a character with Flight can carry something in his arms as he flies" statement. This would certainly make TK more useful for ferrying your comrades around. But since the FAQ quote doesn't specifically address the maximum speed you could "carry" the object at, maybe it just means to you can move the object simultaneously with moving yourself (i.e. not two 1/2 phase actions).

Re: Help: Sniper Syndrome Here's another possibility for encouraging the Sniper to get into the same game as the rest of the team: How about a villian (or an environmental side-effect), that causes the heroes to exchange bodies at the outset of the combat? Now everyone has to make do with their new skill set (GM: "You all feel a brief, but intense feeling of dizziness." Player "I fly up to the top of the building..." GM: "Your boot jets don't seem to be activating, and you feel bulkier than normal somehow..." (Hmm, perhaps he's got the body of the team brick?)) The hoped-for outcome is the sniper character will have a chance to see someone else have fun mixing it up with his character, maybe without resorting to firing from afar.... Plus, of course, maybe having fun mixing it up with someone elses PC, without being able to snipe. This has the benefit of getting the sniper player out of sniping mode, without specially targeting the sniper character This can provide a real break for the routine, and be blast for all involved. (It does depend on a certain amount of player-to-player trust, however.) Needless to say, as GM you'd have to make sure no-one got killed under another PC's control, that would be unfair!