Author Topic: Magic with Necessary Items  (Read 3322 times)

Offline dger

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: Magic with Necessary Items
« Reply #15 on: June 30, 2011, 06:16:43 AM »
What about a modified "catch"?

Offline Tedronai

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2343
  • Damane
    • View Profile
Re: Magic with Necessary Items
« Reply #16 on: June 30, 2011, 07:47:17 AM »
Costed how?
Even Chaotic Neutral individuals have to apologize sometimes. But at least we don't have to mean it.
Slough

Offline Haru

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 5520
  • Mentally unstable like a fox.
    • View Profile
Re: Magic with Necessary Items
« Reply #17 on: June 30, 2011, 08:39:09 AM »
What about a modified "catch"?
That's essentialy what 'Item of Power' means, it is the catch that the ability or rather the item the ability is attached to can be taken away, and the item is always somewhat obvious, at least to those in the know.
“Do you not know that a man is not dead while his name is still spoken?”
― Terry Pratchett, Going Postal

Offline dger

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: Magic with Necessary Items
« Reply #18 on: July 01, 2011, 05:49:26 AM »
It seems like the main point here was to create a condition under which a certain power (evocation/Thaum) does not work. Thus a catch (kinda).
An item of power is inherently an item that has power. 
Is the focus the item itself, or the condition of having it or not.
Also, what if a certain item is lost/destroyed and then replaced?
It just seems to be easier to model the situation with the catch.  At least to me.

Offline Sanctaphrax

  • White Council
  • Seriously?
  • ****
  • Posts: 12403
    • View Profile
Re: Magic with Necessary Items
« Reply #19 on: July 02, 2011, 02:28:56 AM »
Mechanically, I don't see much difference between a catch and an IoP in this case.

Could you elaborate, please?

The lost/destroyed thing seems to apply equally with both methods, so far as I can see.

Offline Drachasor

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 871
    • View Profile
Re: Magic with Necessary Items
« Reply #20 on: July 02, 2011, 02:59:29 AM »
Additionally this is the very thing that the OP is asking for. How can I represent a situation under which all of my magic is shut down? Seems odd to rail against the goal of the post itself.

I only meant that an IoP does this better than just an aspect.  A pure aspect would have to say one thing and mean a host of other things, unless it is going to be "All my magic power is in me bag o' bones" or something.  Yes, you can certainly make it so it works that way and so everyone understands it.  However, I do not think it is terribly elegant when you want to also have all these crunch aspects too.

An item that has powers attached frankly screams IoP, and it is simply enough to modify the base IoP rules to get it to work perfectly.  It would be like making a vampire, and instead of taking Hunger, just taking an aspect to cover it.  The result is much more crude.

Offline dger

  • Participant
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: Magic with Necessary Items
« Reply #21 on: July 02, 2011, 06:38:23 AM »
My point was this: the Bones in the running example are in and of themselves not magical (they could be but I don't think that was the original intent).  The the character for whatever reason (extreme object fixation, actual metaphysical laws, whatever) cannot use magic without them.  Just like inherited silver is not in and of itself magical (yes, I can understand the debate here), but to the right critter...
My argument is to look at a catch as not just the presence of something (like the abouve silver in bullet for suddenly impacting your body) and expand its meaning to include the ABSENCE of something.
Also, with a catch, you don't have as many steps to go through for the same result (K.I.S.S principle).

Offline sinker

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2115
    • View Profile
Re: Magic with Necessary Items
« Reply #22 on: July 02, 2011, 11:32:10 PM »
I only meant that an IoP does this better than just an aspect.  A pure aspect would have to say one thing and mean a host of other things, unless it is going to be "All my magic power is in me bag o' bones" or something.  Yes, you can certainly make it so it works that way and so everyone understands it.  However, I do not think it is terribly elegant when you want to also have all these crunch aspects too.

The way I see it most aspects should say one thing and imply many things. Then there are many interesting and creative ways to use it. "All my magic power is in me bag o' bones" is a terrible aspect because it does one thing and one thing only.

Consider the following example. I have the aspect "Sound body, sound magic." That implies a whole lot of things. I'm probably a health and fitness nut. This can be invoked on athletics and might checks, as well as scholarship (health knowledge and first aid). I'm obviously a mage, and probably a good one. I can invoke this for bonuses on magic rolls. I suppose you could also go with the cheesy double entendre and say maybe I'm an air/sonic mage but I'm not so much a fan of that.... But most importantly it implies that they are connected, and perhaps a unsound body equals unsound magic.

Now I also have the aspect "The mob took my hand, I got it back in a bag." This implies that I might have an enemy, and because the mob doesn't do that kind of thing for no reason it definitely implies mob ties. I can invoke that for some connections in any area that might fall prey to corruption. If I'm the kind of guy who has mob ties then I likely have some criminal experience. Maybe I can invoke this for bonuses to deceit or burglary. Most importantly it states that I lost my hand. My body is not sound and that the first aspect can be compelled when the GM feels it should be important to the story.

Yes these aspects require context, however that's not hard to provide. I could probably condense that further and give it to the GM in a sentence or two. But most importantly they both tell a story about who I am, and they both contain so much great use, both positive and negative.

This is how I think personal aspects should be.

Offline Sanctaphrax

  • White Council
  • Seriously?
  • ****
  • Posts: 12403
    • View Profile
Re: Magic with Necessary Items
« Reply #23 on: July 03, 2011, 02:45:25 AM »
IoP seems simpler to me. Just remove the unbreakability and the loanability. For The Catch, you have to make something new.