esampson

Re: What if there are no super-prisons? Ok. Given those situations what I would see is this: The Government is not going to be happy with Supernal running his own prison. That's just a fact of life. Maybe they can't come in and seize the mirror cells and maybe they view the heroes as too important to alienate but they will never be happy with the idea of someone running their own prison. It's just a fact. That said their very first step would probably be to ask nicely for the mirror cell technology. They would probably use logical arguments pointing out the legal problems that the character is creating for themselves, the legal problems that the character is creating for the government, the fact that there needs to be people monitoring and the character can't do it all the time, etc.. If that fails the government might offer some kind of carrot. What that might be I have no clue. Depends upon the characters. Given what you've stated I doubt very much the government will ever move to the stick. Probably the closest would be someone very carefully pointing out that the character's refusal will negatively affect their relationship with the government. It may still be a good relationship, but it won't be as good as it was. The character is almost certainly going to have difficulty with organizations like the ACLU. In addition to the fact that the characters are not authorized to be running a prison Valak has not been tried (or most likely even charged or arraigned). The past decade we have detained certain individuals under the title of 'enemy combatants' but part of that is predicated upon the concept that we are at war with a group of soldiers of a non-conventional sort. You can't really argue that you are at war with a single individual, so how do the characters plan to allow Valak to be properly charged, arraigned, and stand trial?

Re: Team Building

Re: The One, True Son of Krypton That's in dog inches.

Re: What if there are no super-prisons? Well, the first question is what does the US Government know? Does it know that this person was put in a mirror cell? Does it know who constructed the mirror cells? In a similar vein, what does the public know? The Government's response will be somewhat modified by public knowledge.

Re: Help with introductory adventure I should also add that it isn't that difficult to write up a summary of a 30-50 page adventure that a new GM would spend $5-$25 for (as much as I appreciate the compliment). Ideas are the easy part. Lots of people have ideas. It's doing all the work to detail those ideas that takes most of the effort. Those 30-50 pages don't just write themselves Take a look at Balabanto's progress on his Imaginary Friends supplement for a great example of that (http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php/86037-Imaginary-Friends-Update).

Re: Everyman VPPs

Re: Focus others can activate Well, the examples given were for a focus that someone could creep up and activate it if the hero were unconscious. I would definitely term that an advantage. There was no real mention made of bad guys activating the focus at inconvenient moments. If it is meant more as a disadvantage then you have options such as Accidental Change or possibly Limited Power: Power loses about a fourth of its overall effectiveness since it can be triggered against your will (but honestly, that would have to happen an awful lot)

Re: Help with introductory adventure Thanks, but I can't take that much credit for it. It's basically the structure of a three act play with setup, turning point, and climax. There's an extra fight in there in the first act (I called it the introduction, but it's technically part of the first act) that takes the place of some of the exposition that draws the group together (which is why it should be pretty much a cake walk for the players) but that's not all that unusual. The attack on the heroes is the second act turning point (bad guys have our mentor-to-be or at least know where we live) which builds to the third act, the big brawl. Three act play is a great mechanism. You don't even have to look all that hard to see it in the Avengers. Some (probably a lot, in fact) literary techniques don't translate real well to the gaming table. That's one of the reasons I said to stay away from having Mentor-to-be getting injured during the fight. Works great in stories, doesn't really even harm the players, but in my experience it just causes these niggling feeling that the scene wasn't as interactive. Like the PCs are standing around for the GMs story rather than being in control of the players. That said, some literary techniques tend to work really well, like the three act play. These are techniques that have been honed by countless authors over centuries, so absolutely steal like a maniac when you have the opportunity.

Re: Focus others can activate I think the best way you could do it would be with the Trigger advantage.

Re: Help with introductory adventure Well, first thing I would do is talk to the noob players before hand and find out what kind of characters they want. Steer them away from complex concepts in favor of simpler ones like 'Brick', 'Speedster', 'Blaster', etc. and then create the characters for them. For the adventure itself I would start them right off with combat. Given your plot line I would think a good fight would be to have them stumble across a fight occurring between their already wounded soon to be mentor and some bad guys. Make the fight simple, just some minions, so that the players can beat the snot out of them, feel good, and be pumped up. Have the mentor start out injured. Sure, it's more dramatic to have him become injured partway through the fight when you're writing a story but when events that can't occur due to dice rolls happen in the middle of fights (even to NPCs) it reduces the feeling that the players had any appreciable effect and that things are just happening because that's what the GM decided. That's your introduction. Then have the soon to be mentor explain to the characters that he needs their help. There's a plot afoot but due to the injuries he's just sustained he needs the players help. He doesn't have all the information but he knows enough to direct the players to a location where they get into another fight. After the fight the players collect clues which they bring back to their mentor. That's the first act. The players return to their mentor who looks over the clues. Before the mentor can fully explain the clues the group is attacked. The attackers main goal is to kidnap the mentor but don't railroad it. If the mentor is captured then the players use something he said to find his store of information. Using this information and the clues they just gathered they are able to piece together what the villain's plan is and where they are located. If the mentor isn't captured then he can simply put the information together and tell the players what the villain's plan is and where they are located. That's your second act. Players go to beat up the villains in their lair. If their mentor was captured they can rescue him. If not they are all about foiling the villain's plan. That's your third act. With evil thwarted the mentor can tell the players how well they worked together, how he (or she) has decided that they need to retire but how they think that the new group of heroes can take over for them and how they will be happy to help the new group with their experience and resources they've developed over their years as a hero. Players get to chose a name for their hero group and make a corny statement about how evil better beware on the final panel. That's your denouement.

Re: Help with introductory adventure Is this an adventure to introduce players to a new campaign or is it to introduce players to Champions (looks more like the former but it would be good to be sure).

Re: The One, True Son of Krypton

Re: Solution to Multipowers within VPPs. Ok. So here's the example: Honey Badger is an ex-VIPER agent who decided to leave VIPER and try to live the life of a hero. Before fleeing from VIPER he was able to steal a large amount of VIPER equipment (Honey Badger don't care) which he now uses to fight VIPER. [TABLE=class: grid, width: 90%] [TR] [TD]68[/TD] [TD]Gadget Pool: Variable Power Pool, 68 base[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]15[/TD] [TD]Gadget Pool: 61 Control Cost (30 Active Points); Limited Power: Can only be changed in armory (-1/2), IIF (-1/4), Limited Effect: Gadgets (-1/4)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]24[/TD] [TD]Gadget Pool: No Skill Roll Required (+1), Powers Can Be Changed As A Zero-Phase Action (+1) for up to 30 Active Points of Control Cost (60 Active Points); Limited Power: Power can only be changed in armory with the exception of approved ammunition or reasonable multi-functioning weapons. (-1), Limited Effect: Gadgets (-1/4), IIF (-1/4)[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] In this case 68 points for the base is the minimum number of points needed to completely equip himself with the standard gear of a VIPER general combat specialist (which we will show below). Depending on what he's got in his stockpile he will probably want to increase the size of that pool, but that's the easiest thing to do since it's a straight 1:1. The 61 points of control cost is the minimum number of points he needs to fit the most expensive effect (which we will also see below). Most of the gear is pretty straight forward. The one piece of equipment that causes problems is his VB-A1 “Striker” Blaster Rifle because it is built as a Multipower. Just to add to the headaches it is built with a charge limitation on the Multipower, but of course we don't want to place a charge limitation on the VPP itself. I figured the best way to simulate this was to build the two 'slots' of the gun each as having 32 charges and then give each of them a side-effect that causes them to use up each other's charges. The gun also has a third function, a Hand Attack. Since the Hand Attack doesn't use up charges it is put outside the Multipower but since we aren't constructing our gun with charges on the Multipower we can stick the HA as an additional VPP 'slot'. That gives us the following: [TABLE=class: grid, width: 90%] [TR] [TD]20[/TD] [TD]Basic Setting: Blast 8d6 (50 Active Points); OAF (VB-A1 “Striker” Blaster Rifle; -1), Side Effects, Side Effect occurs automatically whenever Power is used (Firing uses equal charges from Autofire Setting; -1/2), 32 Charges (+1/4)[/TD] [TD][32][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]24[/TD] [TD]Autofire Setting: Blast 7d6, Autofire (5 shots; +1/2) (61 Active Points); OAF (VB-A1 “Striker” Blaster Rifle; -1), Side Effects, Side Effect occurs automatically whenever Power is used (Firing uses equal charges from Basic Setting; -1/2), 32 Charges (+1/4)[/TD] [TD][32][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]7[/TD] [TD]Rifle-butt Club: HA +3d6 (15 Active Points); OAF (VB-A1 “Striker” Blaster Rifle; -1), Hand-To-Hand Attack (-1/4)[/TD] [TD=align: center]1[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] So I'm not totaling the slots because this is a VPP and since the slots all fall into the "approved ammunition or reasonable multi-functioning weapons" limitation I can switch between these slots at will. All I'm really interested in are two things. What's the highest active cost of any slot (61 for the autofire setting) and what's the highest real cost of any slot (24, also for the autofire setting). So now we get down to the point total for all the equipment carried by Honey Badger when he outfits himself as a general combat specialist we total up how many points he needs for each item: [TABLE=class: grid, width: 90%] [TR] [TD]24[/TD] [TD]VB-A1 “Striker” Blaster Rifle (see above)[/TD] [TD][32] or 1[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]15[/TD] [TD]VB-S1 “Shorty” Blaster Pistol: Blast 7d6 (35 Active Points); OAF (VB-S1 “Shorty” Blaster Pistol; -1), 12 Charges (-1/4)[/TD] [TD][12][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right]12[/TD] [TD]VIPER Fang: (Total: 26 Active Cost, 12 Real Cost) HKA 1d6 (2d6 w/STR), Reduced Endurance (0 END; +1/2); OAF (VIPER Fang; -1) (Real Cost: 11) plus Range Based On STR (+1/4) for up to 15 Active Points of the HKA; 1 Recoverable Charge (-1 1/4), OAF (VIPER Fang; -1), Lockout (cannot use HKA until Charge is recovered; -1/2) (Real Cost: 1)[/TD] [TD][1rc][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right]10[/TD] [TD]VIPER BCU (Basic): Resistant Protection (6 PD/6 ED) (18 Active Points); OIF (VIPER BCU (Basic); -1/2), Requires A Roll (14- roll; Must be made each Phase/use; does not protect Hit Locations 3-5 or 6-7; -1/4)[/TD] [TD][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right]2[/TD] [TD]VIPER Helmet (Basic) Protection: Resistant Protection (2 PD/2 ED) (6 Active Points); Requires A Roll (8- roll; Must be made each Phase/use; only protects Hit Locations 3-5; -1 3/4), OIF (VIPER Helmet (Basic); -1/2)[/TD] [TD][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right]6[/TD] [TD]VIPER Helmet (Basic) Communications System: Radio Perception/Transmission (Radio Group) (10 Active Points); OIF (VIPER Helmet (Basic); -1/2), Sense Affected As More Than One Sense: Affected As Hearing Group As Well As Radio Group (-1/4)[/TD] [TD][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right]68[/TD] [TD]Total[/TD] [TD][/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Now this isn't really a completely optimized build. In lots of games the GM will allow players to put a pistol and a knife in the same Weaponry Multipower as a Rifle. VIPER agents don't have such a Multipower. Now you could argue they don't have it because the construction of the first Multipower with charges on the Multipower pool itself precludes that, but you could always build the Multipower without the charges, stick the charges onto both slots, and then add the side effect like I did. Additionally, even if you didn't think to do it that way you could always build a second Multipower to handle the Rifle-butt club, pistol, and knife. Since the VIPER agent doesn't have such a Multipower I am going to assume such Multipowers are frowned upon in the particular game he is played in (the reality is probably just that he doesn't have such optimizations because he's an NPC, but we'll ignore that) and so I constructed Honey Badger along similar lines. He winds up paying a few more points than a standard VIPER agent (107 points as opposed to 88 points) but that's the price you pay for being more flexible. On the other hand if the VIPER agents were allowed more optimal builds then I would similarly optimize Honey Badger and shave off 27 points of his base pool by shifting the 24 points from the rifle to either pistol or knife as needed. Of course this would require a slight rework of the Naked Advantage to his control cost since the limitation becomes 'Power can only be changed in armory with the exception of switching between approved ammunition, reasonable multi-functioning weapons or various weapons of an approved weapon load'. The end result however should be pretty much the same. The character with the VPP will cost a bit more than the character with the Multipower because of his greater flexibility but not excessive amounts more.

Re: Solution to Multipowers within VPPs. I think, also, you might be a little confused about the intent of this. There is no actual Multipower nested within the VPP framework. What I'm talking about is setting limitations and advantages to the VPP that allows someone with a VPP to effectively imitate a Multipower within the VPP when needed. To use your example weapon the character would need the following at a minimum: [TABLE=class: grid, width: 90%] [TR] [TD=align: right]22[/TD] [TD]Variable Power Pool Points[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right]7[/TD] [TD]45 Control Cost (22 Active Points); OAF (-1), Limited Effect: Guns (-1/2), Can Only be changed in armory (-1/2)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right]12[/TD] [TD]Naked Advantage: No Skill Roll Required (+1), Powers Can Be Changed As A Zero-Phase Action (+1) for up to 22 Active Points (44 Active Points); Limited Power: Power can only be changed in armory with the exception of approved ammunition or reasonable multi-functioning weapons. (-1), OAF (-1), Limited Effect: Guns (-1/2)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=align: right]41[/TD] [TD]Total[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] This then allows the following effects: [TABLE=class: grid, width: 90%] [TR] [TD]22[/TD] [TD]Single Fire: (Total: 45 Active Cost, 22 Real Cost) Blast 7d6 (35 Active Points); OAF (Rifle; -1) (Real Cost: 17) plus +5 with any single attack (10 Active Points); OAF (Rifle; -1) (Real Cost: 5)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]22[/TD] [TD]Burst Fire: Blast 7d6, Autofire (3 shots; +1/4) (44 Active Points); OAF (Rifle; -1)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]22[/TD] [TD]Full Auto: Blast 6d6, Autofire (5 shots; +1/2) (45 Active Points); OAF (Rifle; -1)[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] The 45 point control cost is needed since the largest effect is 45 active points. The 22 point pool is needed because the largest real cost on any of the slots is 22 points. You will probably have noticed some of the limitations to the Control Cost and Naked Advantage have changed. The focus limitation increased to OAF since with the given example the character doesn't show any need to use foci with lower limitations. Likewise the Limited Effect limitation increased since we have no evidence in the example that the person is going to use the pool for anything other than guns. On the other hand the Limited Power limitation decreased. As it was originally written it was assuming that for many of the character's 'Multipower' slots it would take a full phase to change to reflect swapping out clips. Since it appears that in the case of this character most of their guns can simply switch from one function to another they are not as limited, so the limitation becomes less. Of course this example is still a bit limited. I've got an idea for a pool for an example character who is an ex-VIPER agent. Since he's always carrying different equipment he's best served with a VPP but the standard VIPER blaster is a Multipower which ordinarily can't be placed into a VPP. Unfortunately time is a little limited for me right this moment so I will have to write it up tonight.

Re: Solution to Multipowers within VPPs. Not sure about the whole unified thing. While it is certainly possible for someone to make a Drain that affects RKAs I can't recall ever actually seeing one, so it seems like an additional complication (on top of an already complicated solution) that's not really needed. Even in the case of people with broader ability to neutralize powers pretty typically the special effect is such that it wouldn't tend to have an effect on something like an assault rifle.* Also, you've got a lot of things in your example that I wouldn't build that way. Autofire is just an autofire. There's already rules for using it to cover a large area, so if I was your GM and you tried to buy it as an AoE I would assume what you're actually trying to do is short-circuit people with high DCVs and say 'No'. (You can still do things like explosions from a grenade launcher to take care of them if you want, just not an AoE from autofire). I think that's more of a stylistic difference between you and I, however. Based on some of our earlier conversations I think you generally want to give special effects more leeway than I am comfortable with, which is fine. GMs have to draw the line on rules where they see fit and different GMs will draw the line in different places. As for not being able to take multiple charges or increased endurance cost, I don't see why you couldn't. Charges are allowed on VPP slots in some occasions.

Re: Why Your Heroes Shouldn't Kill http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/1544131/Man-dies-after-7-day-computer-game-session.html

Re: Time Frame for Appearance of Superhumans My real point was that ironically most of those who were actual punished would have been innocent, while the guilty would have probably been able to escape (not that it would have been all fun and games from them or anything).

Re: Solution to Multipowers within VPPs. Actually, the VPP I designed should work fairly well for the Punisher. Just replace 'Lab' with 'Armory' (and probably extend the 'Limited Effect') While I listed the focus limit as IIF that was only because that's the smallest limit that might be applied to a gadget (such as a hidden radio transciever). Devices can just as easily be OIF or OAF. It doesn't change the control cost (unless a character is unable to use an IIF). It just means the character uses up less of the pool with those foci. A large part of the reason for designing the pool was to simulate the ability of someone like the Punisher to do things such as carry an M-16 with an M203 grenade launcher underneath as well as a selection of ammunition and shells, which is well suited to be a Multipower, without having to have a large enough pool to purchase all the different attacks independently.

Re: Multiform From his Variable Power Pool, of course.

Re: Solution to Multipowers within VPPs. Well, technically as written a VPP doesn't have to have things defined ahead of time (and in some cases like the mimic pool you really can't, although the power is defined by someone else ahead of time in that case). I do see a lot of write-ups that include pre-made slots for VPPs but in pretty much all cases that's usually for convenience (even in the cases where the VPP represents things that can only be changed between scenes they aren't the only things the VPP can be used for). On the other hand letting players have completely unrestricted VPPs like that can lead to complete chaos on the part of the GM (as in the case of the argon bullets) as well as several other big imbalances that might need to be addressed (NND attacks being a huge one since the player can just switch from life support to fully resistant PD to fully resistant ED, lather, rinse, repeat). So I'm not trying to say you're doing it wrong by requiring things like pre-written powers or applying certain restrictions to the VPP (and in fact I agree that you simply have to put some restrictions on them). Just saying that as a technical point it isn't Rules As Written.

Re: Solution to Multipowers within VPPs. 'Gadget Pool' is actually an old term that proceeds the VPP. It basically was a VPP with the 'Only in Lab limitation' although there was also a skill at the time called 'Gadgettering' that would let you alter the powers of any gadget. With the release of the Variable Power Pool it went away as redundant (similar to the way we no longer have Armor and Force Field). I've always had a fondness for them because they let a player do things like keep an array of weapons at home and then chose which ones they were going out with or keep an array of specialized armors that they could go and change into, but it still required planning. I always found that doing things like the Batman utility belt (where you didn't have the "Only in Lab" limitation) tended to get a bit silly with characters always having just what they needed (oh! he's got a vulnerability to frozen argon carrying a positive ionic charge? What a coincidence! I have a gun that shoots bullets composed of frozen argon carrying a positive ionic charge. [Ok, I would smack someone trying that, but you get the idea]). Yeah, like I said earlier, as a GM I don't really have a problem with allowing people to copy a Multipower with a VPP or to have certain 'reasonable' weapons that have Multipower in their gadget pool. However it isn't actually Rules As Written and I came up with this as a possible solution for people who might have trouble with that. I decided to throw it out there for review becomes sometimes the line between 'clever' and 'rules lawyer' can get really thin and it can be especially difficult to see when that line is crossed when it's your own idea. Happily it seems like other than perhaps quibbling over the exact value of some of the limitations (and those values are going to change from character to character anyway) it seems like no one has any real problems with the concept.

Re: Gods with Off Switches vs. Loaded Guns. DC vs. Marvel in Character Design. "I drank what?" Socrates

Re: Solution to Multipowers within VPPs. I'm having some difficulty following your math. Since you still get the IIF(-1/4) and Limited Effect: Gadgets (-1/4) on the base control cost and the 'Cosmic' advantage that would seem to me to be: [TABLE=class: grid, width: 100%] [TR] [TD]13[/TD] [TD]Control Cost (20 Active Points); IIF (-1/4), Limited Effect: Gadgets (-1/4)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]11[/TD] [TD]Naked Advantage: No Skill Roll Required (+1), Powers Can Be Changed As A Zero-Phase Action (+1) for up to 20 Active Points (40 Active Points); Limited Power: Power can only be changed in laboratory with the exception of approved ammunition or reasonable multi-functioning weapons. May require a full phase action to change powers depending upon special effect. (-2), Limited Effect: Gadgets (-1/4), IIF (-1/4)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD]24[/TD] [TD]Total[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Which ironically is less than what I earlier had (I need to double check. I think I accidentally made the Limited Effect: Gadget an advantage). I'd probably only give you a -1 1/2 like I did in the earlier example personally, but that only increases the cost of the naked advantage to 13. (edit: Yeah. I messed up in my earlier example where I broke the control cost down to base control cost and a naked advantage. That 18 should have been 13, so the earlier example should have been 23 points instead of 28, so if my new math is correct your method would cost 1 point more [or 3 points using my less generous -1 1/2]). (second edit: I just realized, technically without the limitation 'Only change powers in lab (-1/2)' on the base control cost if the limitation to the naked advantage comes into effect (i.e. not a previously approved ammunition or reasonable multi-functioning weapon) I am left with only a IIF(-1/4) and Limited Effects: Gadgets (-1/4) limitation to the control cost, meaning I can still change the slots. It just takes me a full phase and a skill roll in combat. Of course at that point I'm worried about things becoming excessively 'rules-lawyery' and so if my GM was to say that I couldn't take the limitation because it wasn't a real limitation and I couldn't change the pool under the standard VPP rules due to the special effect I would go along with it anyway rather than fight over it. It was just a 'technical point' that occurred to me).

Re: Solution to Multipowers within VPPs. Sorry. Perhaps I wasn't clear. That's what my solution is. You don't actually have a multipower within a VPP. You just use the normal VPP ability to swap powers, however the ability to swap powers is limited. Whereas someone who normally took '0 phase' and 'no skill roll' could simply swap to pretty much any power they want at will a character with this build is intended to primarily swap their powers 'in the lab' with a highly limited ability to swap some of the powers in the field. In essence you are using the normal functions of a VPP to simulate the fact that some of the gadgets are normally best build using a multipower but there is no actual multipower involved.* Now, could I build the character under the more standard 'gadget pool' build and buy each type of ammo as special attacks? Sure. However the way the points work out there's no difference between me taking one gun that fires 4 different types of rounds and 4 different guns and as a character you're actually better off taking the 4 different guns (since they have to each be taken away with separate disarm maneuvers). Additionally having to purchase the attacks separately can put the gadgeteer at a significant disadvantage points-wise against someone building weapon with a reasonable multipower (obviously the gadgeteer should have to pay something more for their flexibility but not being able to use multipowers at all would probably make them pay significantly more). I could also build the character as a 'cosmic gadget pool'. I can change the power to whatever I want whenever I want to represent the fact that 'Wait a minute, I have the perfect gadget right here!' (and in fact this proposal is basically a more limited form of that to prevent the ability to absolutely change to any gadget desired). This seems to me like a good middle ground between the those two options. Of course it requires a bit of a firm hand on the part of the GM (no, I'm not letting you take all your weapons as alternate powers, just different functions for each weapon) but I've always been of the opinion that the only real way to run a successful Champions game is for the GM and the players to be working together rather than the players trying to force through things because the book says they can do it. On the other hand, maybe it still seems to you to be too powergaming. That's one of the reasons I wrote it up and threw it out there, to see what people think. Please let me know if you still think the build is too 'powergamey' now that I've clarified (and I would welcome any suggestions about how to modify the build so it seems less so). *While I am primarily referring in terms of gadget pools and multipowers this solution also has other applications such as a VPP used to mimic powers which is then used on someone with a multipower. Rather than wasting points by copying each slot independently or only copying a limited number of the slots the mimic can copy all the slots, switching between them through the VPP without having to 're-copy' each time they want to change. Of course in such a case the limitations would need to be changed but the core concept remains.

Re: Multiform Yeah, but I don't think you do have a very limited power by doing it that way. I mean is there really anything you can't do (aside from purchase an ability without embedding it in a Multiform first)? I'm asking because there is every possibility I'm misunderstanding something. Just trying to find out what it is.