Welcome! These forums will be deactivated by the end of this year. The conversation continues in a new morph over on Discord! Please join us there for a more active conversation and the occasional opportunity to ask developers questions directly! Go to the PS+ Discord Server.

Morph Categories (Derived from Right at Home Thread)

6 posts / 0 new
Last post
Maudova Maudova's picture
Morph Categories (Derived from Right at Home Thread)
I didn’t want to thread jack the Right at Home thread so I created this one but, they are related. The TLDR topic of discussion is in the Right at Home Trait thread was a question paraphrasing “Is the Right at Home Trait relevant with the number of Morphs in play vs. the morphs that were in play when the trait was written?”. It was pointed out that the broad categories of Biomorph, Pod, Synthmorph, & Infomorph were too big to be covered in whole by a single trait. With that it was suggested that the morph classes/groups need to be broken down further, allowing the Right at Home trait to be purchased for common groupings of morphs. So I tried as best I could to break them down into categories that made sense (at least to me). The suggested purchase order would be single morph > all of that morphs variants > morph group for a 5, 10, & 15 CP cost (IIRC). Below the spoilers is how I tried to break everything down by individual morph, variants, and then their groups. Biomorphs
Spoiler: Highlight to view
Biomorphs were to be broken down into further groups such as Uplift genus, Morph variants, and then there were a whole slew of biomorphs that seemed to be either their own species or genus which I am calling uncategorized. The first thing I am going to cover is uplifts in the next post. All page references in the following posts are referencing the Morph Recognition guide unless otherwise stated. - Uplifted Biomorphs I took a look at how the developers were classifying uplifts and it didn’t seem to align with how we currently classify living organisms Domain > Kingdom > Phylum > Class > Order > Family > Genus > Species with Suborders, and Subclasses mixed in for good measure. As stated before the developers didn’t define the groups of Uplifts by their Taxonomic classifications. These are separated on obvious lines that are easy to understand. Uplift Biomorph Classifications: • Neo-Hominid - (Gorillas, Neanderthals, Bonobos, Chimps, & Orangutans) • Neo-Avian - (Raven, Parrots, Falcons & etc.) • Neo-Cetacean - (Dolphin, Orca, Porpoise, Beluga, & Whale). • Neo-Cephalopod - (Octopus, Squid, Cuttlefish & etc.) • Neo-Suina - (Pigs, Boars, Warthogs & etc.) - Humanoid Biomorph The next set would be the largely humanoid groups of biomorphs. Ones with confirmed morphological lines derived from the base morph gene stock. Its groups naturally by Humanoid Biomorph Classifications: • Aquanaut - (Aquanaut & Selkie) • Splicer - (Splicer & Freeman) • Exalts Variants - (Exalt, Futura, & Lunar Flyer) are their others that I missed? It seems like this being the most common biomorph on the market would mean there were more, at least in my train of thought. • Bouncer Variants - (Bouncer) I thought there were bouncer variants but I didn't see any in the Morph Recognition Guide. • Ruster Variants - (Ruster, Premium Ruster (not sure where I remember seeing this), & Crasher) • Remade Variants - They talk about them in books but there are none published • Menton Variants - (Menton & Faust) Does the Hyperbright count in this category? • Hulder - (Caribou (not written) & Ariel - What do you folks think of classing all three together or maybe just the Hulder and Ariel?) - Unclassified Humanoid Biomorphs The problem with the Right at Home trait as suggested largely derives from the fact that there are so many unclassified or ungroups morphs (not limited to Biomorphs). If the trait was going to be purchased for a single morph, then a group of related morphs, then then the larger morphological group they belong to this presents a problem. The unclassified biomorphs would have to be purchased individually without the possibility to buy morph variants and then what? Would you then purchase all Humanoid Biomorphs skipping a stage and getting all humanoids at a discount? Unclassified Humanoid Biomorph Cla…Mess: • Bruiser Pg. 14 • Cloud Skate Pg. 18 • Dvergr Pg. 26 • Flat Pg. 31 • Ghost Pg. 41 • Grey Pg. 42 • Hazer Pg. 45 • Hibernoid Pg. 46 • Matian Alpiner Pg. 55 • Neotenic Pg. 68 • Nomad Pg. 70 • Observer Pg. 72 • Olympians Pg. 74 • Ring Flyer Pg. 80 • Salamander Pg. 84 • Surya Pg. 99 • Sylph Pg. 102 • Theseus Pg. 106 • Venusian Glider Pg. 108
Pods
Spoiler: Highlight to view
Then there are Pods. Pods are a little harder to break down as there are some that are specifically called out as being cheap version of normal bimorphs (Exalt specifically) but, I am going to ignore that for now and try to classify them as a group in onto themselves. Some of the groupings I made are arguable but, Pods as a group is a little odd in the first place and I am giving them the least effort. I expect forum users to argue points on these classifications. - Humanoid Pods While this is the most obvious set of pods to classify, the problem with humanoid pods is that they are much like unclassified humanoid biomorphs. Humanoid Pods don’t have any derived variants. So purchasing them at the base level of per morph, then to the variants level, and then the group does not work as you skip right from single morph to group again. Humanoid Pod Classification: • Ayah • Basic • Digger • Jenkin • Pleasure • Security • Shaper • Specialist • Vacuum • Worker - Non-human Pods Again like other Pod morphs there aren’t any real groupings for non-human pods at all, and they barely make sense as a larger group anyways. Out of the non-human pods I think the following could possibly be put into groups. As I said I put the least effort into this type of Morph. If someone has a better way to classify these I am all eyes. Non-human Pod Classification: • Chickcharnie Variant (Chickcharnie, Owlbear) • Critter (Cirtter & Scurrier) • Multi-limbed (Novacrab, Samasa) Then that leaves the following to be just another mess: • Flying Squid • Hypergibbon • Ripwing • Whiplash
Synthmorphs
Spoiler: Highlight to view
Then we have Synthmorphs. This seems to have some more obvious groupings, though most of them don’t have a single taxonomic classification beyond being Synth, nor do most pf them have variants. Some of the groupings are definitely arguable but, I am trying to put them into groups that could be conceivably lumped together for the purposes of the trait: - Vehicular Synthmorphs I put these together due to their general purpose of exploration, travel, or decidedly vehicular function. These are not the sort of morphs you would just hang out in at your local transhuman hub sans morph specific enthusiast hubs. Again we have the problem of little to no morph variations. Vehicular Synthmorph Classifications: • Arachnoid (Arachnoid & (technically a vehicle) Arachnkoma • Cetus • Cloud Skimmer • Courier • Daitya • Fenrir • Nautiloid • Sundiver • Xu Fu - Humanoid Synthmorphs This is the most obvious classification of the Synthmorphs. Though a few of these have morphological lines with variants we keep running into that problem that we can’t purchase the trait with any consistency by Single > Variant > Group Morph types. Humanoid Synthmorph Classifications: • Biocore • Case • Galatea • Gargoyle • Griefer • Guard (Guard and Deluxe Guard) • Savant • Steel Morph (Steel Morph, Liquid Silver, & Masked) • Synth Flier Synthmorphs Flier Synthmorphs was also an easy classification. Pretty much any morph that’s primary locomotion was the flight skill with a decidedly winged shape. Luckily half of these have variants even though the list if only 4 deep. Flier Synthmorph Classifications: • Blackbird • Dragonfly • Fighting Kite (Fighting Kite & Fierce Variant) • Kite (Kite & Ultra Kite Variant) • Opteryx Flexbot Synthmorph (Decentralized Cognition Synthmorphs) One of the hot topic morphs that is itself a set of variant morphs is the Flexbot. While this morph type is itself however, I suggest that Flexbots be groups with Swarmoids in a Decentralized Cognition Morph group. • Flexbot (Apiary, Beekeeper, Bouba, Crafter, Fighter, Grimoire, Longbow, Picklock, Rogue, Sapper, & Wizard) • Swarmoid (Skulker, Smart) Spheroid Synthmorphs Spheroid Synthmorphs are characterized by a generally multidirectional circular, sphere, disk shape, with multiple limbs able to engage in or task in any direction. Spheroid Synthmorph Classifications: • Q-morph • Reaper • Rover (Rover & Space Variant) • Sphere Then again there is this uncategorized group. • Mimic Pg. 57 • Siltheroid Pg. 91 • Spare Pg. 92 • Synthtaur Pg. 104 • Takko Pg. 105
Infomorphs
Spoiler: Highlight to view
Infomorphs only variety are Eidolons. This is the only system that works flawlessly with the system of Morph > Variant > Group Infomorph Classification: • Infomorph (Agent, Digimorph, Elite, Hot Shot, Sage, Scholar, Slave, Wirehead)
In short it appears this method works on a number of instances but, it is problematic in most instances.
~Alpha Fork Initialized. P.S. I often post from my phone as I travel extensively for work. Please forgive typos and grammar issues.
DivineWrath DivineWrath's picture
Deleted. I decided that this
Deleted. I decided that this post distracted from the topic of this thread, namely sorting morphs into groups.
DivineWrath DivineWrath's picture
I would argue that Exalts,
I would argue that Exalts, Mentons, Olympians, and Sylphs are of the same group. If you look at them, they look like variant morphs of the Exalt. One is built for smarts, another for muscle, and another for beauty. The Futura is outright described as being an exalt variant in its write up. If you are willing to stretch that logic a bit further, then you could add the bouncer and neotenic as well. They all have aptitude caps of 30 (neotonic is 20 for SOM), close to +20 in aptitude bonuses, close 35 durability, and at least 30 cp in cost (except the neotenic, which is 25, but it is a small morph). I might fit the splicer, ruster, and hibernoid in the same group. They are like early augmented biomorphs. The splicer is the iconic one. The ruster and hibernoid look like they are specialized and improvement variants. The splicer gets an aptitude cap of 25, dur of 30, +5 in aptitude bonuses, and costs 10 cp. The ruster and hibernoid have an aptitude cap of 25, dur of 35, +10 in aptitude bonuses, gets a few new augments, and costs 25 cp.
Maudova Maudova's picture
I agree with you on some of
I agree with you on some of the combinations. I thought that the hibernoid, neotenic, splicer, and maybe the bouncer were in the same group, even though it was not explicitly stated. Essentially hibernoid is a a long haul space splicer, neotenic is just small splicer, bouncer is a splicer for low to zero gravity. I think rusters deserves it's own gene line as it is mentioned in the crasher writup that they are specifically based on ruster genes. While I see what you are saying about mentons, olympians, and sylphs being extensions of the exalt family as they are all near the same level of attribute modifications, I personally see them as the next step in gene tech from the exalt vs just a variant (just imagine them being the new "It" morphs way back in the day). The menton specifically has it's own variant the faust morph. There are also two other exalt variants specifically mentioned in the MRG. IF we are trying to tie the uncategorized morphs into a group it would be easy to toss them into exalt catagory if we absolutely needed to categorize them though. On the subject of where I think morphs should be fit into gene lines. I thought the hazer should be considered an exalt variant because it matches the exalt so closely for mods, stats, and cost. I thought the olympian was the base for the fury as the attribute mods match pretty closely and it makes sense thematically. I also saw the ring flyer as the bouncer, meets hibernoid, meets anti-social space hermit. I would have pointed these things out in my original write up except I was trying to stick to the textbook material with everything except pods (because Pods are sort of a mess thematically anyways).
DivineWrath wrote:
Deleted. I decided that this post distracted from the topic of this thread, namely sorting morphs into groups.
Now I am curious what your original post was.
~Alpha Fork Initialized. P.S. I often post from my phone as I travel extensively for work. Please forgive typos and grammar issues.
DivineWrath DivineWrath's picture
If you are following the
If you are following the variant rules in the transhuman book to the letter, then the faust morph does not qualify as a variant of a menton. It is more than 20 cp different in price. However, if you let that rule slide then another way to look at that morph is it could be a variant of exalt morph (if you accept that the menton is a variant of the exalt). Though I'm not really sure if it should be a menton variant. Its defining qualities focuses around being a morph for asyncs that happens to look like a menton on standard inspections. A fury being a variant of an olympian? I'm not in favor of it. The olympian looks more like an exalt than a fury. I'd be more interested in seeing variants of the fury than lumping it in with the olympian. The hazer? Yeah, sure. It can be an exalt variant. I don't have a problem with that. I skipped it over since I was only focused on the morphs in the core rulebook at the time. The worker pod and pleasure pod are very much like the pod versions of the olympian and sylph. However, being pods they are probably too different from their biomorph equivalents to be lumped together in the same group.
Maudova wrote:
DivineWrath wrote:
Deleted. I decided that this post distracted from the topic of this thread, namely sorting morphs into groups.
Now I am curious what your original post was.
Geez. Even deleted it is distracting. It is this post, more or less (I did some editing before reposting it there). http://eclipsephase.com/comment/55669#comment-55669 Edit: Basically, I came to realize that we were trying to jam a whole bunch of very different synthmorphs into a group. The reason for that was that there wasn't enough morphs like them to give them their own categories. For instance, we have 2 Arachnoids, 1 Dragonfly, 1 Reaper, and 1 Slitheroid. If we got a trait that applied to a group of morphs, you wouldn't get much right now if you picked just "Dragonfly".
Maudova Maudova's picture
Morph Categories
DivineWrath wrote:
If you are following the variant rules in the transhuman book to the letter, then the faust morph does not qualify as a variant of a menton. It is more than 20 cp different in price. However, if you let that rule slide then another way to look at that morph is it could be a variant of exalt morph (if you accept that the menton is a variant of the exalt). Though I'm not really sure if it should be a menton variant. Its defining qualities focuses around being a morph for asyncs that happens to look like a menton on standard inspections.
It may not fit within the technical definition presented in transhuman however the text in the MRG states: The faust is a modified menton morph. Even under the most thorough scans, it appears to be nothing more than a mildly personalized version of that morph. For biomorphs anyways I was trying to follow both genelines and variants. For synths I was trying for generic similarities that made sense functionally. I wasn't trying to follow the variant rules by the letter.
DivineWrath wrote:
A fury being a variant of an olympian? I'm not in favor of it. The olympian looks more like an exalt than a fury. I'd be more interested in seeing variants of the fury than lumping it in with the olympian.
I only say that due to the fact that the morph has the same attribute readout with +5 Wil over the olympian and everything else is just an augmentation with a single trait (enhanced durability +10). Maybe its too far off to be a variant but it looks close.
DivineWrath wrote:
The worker pod and pleasure pod are very much like the pod versions of the olympian and sylph. However, being pods they are probably too different from their biomorph equivalents to be lumped together in the same group.
I hadn't noticed that. Again I paid very little attention to Pods.
~Alpha Fork Initialized. P.S. I often post from my phone as I travel extensively for work. Please forgive typos and grammar issues.