If I correctly understand your case here, here are some cons of using a Morph instead of a slab: [list=]
In a morph you would need to modify the surfaces instead of a segment in slab. Editing the corners is also no very "smart"
[list=]
Slabs have the possibility to work with composites which makes changes much easier. Working with a morph, you would need to model all the layers seperatly
Morphs must be solid if you need to schedule their volumes
If it is not a solid, it wont be exported properly in IFC
Opening holes in a morph needs more steps than doing an opening in a slab
In a morph there are not as much scheduling options as in a slab, especially surfaces
The BIMster @ AllesWirdGut Currently: Archicad 26 User since Archicad 6.5 (2001)
Whilst morphs are a very useful tool I limit their use to difficult connections and shapes where the connections can't be adapted with PBC or SEOs. I see Morphs as a free form volumetric tool whereas slabs are a readily managed and accurate parametric object. That's not to say slabs don't get converted to morphs for further editing on occasion...
Apple iMac Intel i9 / macOS Sonoma / AC27UKI (most recent builds.. if they work)