Author Topic: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?  (Read 46002 times)

Offline bobjob

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 1433
  • Bier, ja? Und mit Dusen-Dusen? Ja!
    • View Profile
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #15 on: March 15, 2013, 05:49:14 PM »
Don't be so harsh, Haru.  I really think it has Sole.

JDK002, it's sir.. And yes Taran, I have Sole. :D
The entire Red Court was taken down by the new Winter Knight? From the lowliest pawn all the way up to the King? *puts on sunglasses* Knight to G7. Check mate.

Playing:
Shale Buckby

Offline EdgeOfDreams

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 332
    • View Profile
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #16 on: March 15, 2013, 07:09:24 PM »
Quote
Template (Focused Practitioner)
Lore and Discipline at Great, Conviction at Good
Powers/Stunts: Channeling [-2] and Ritual [-2] (I'm less sure on the elements/theme for these, but that seems up to player preference)

Now if I've understood this so far, it looks like that means that I get 4 focus item slots. I think (I'm less sure here) that I could use all 4 slots to get a focus item that gave a +4 to offensive control of whatever element I chose for Channeling.

On a more serious note, I'd like to add a clarification to this. As I understand the rules, you have 2 Evocation Focus Item Slots and 2 Thaumaturgy Focus Item Slots, so you can only get +2 to offensive control. The other 2 slots need to be spent on bonuses for Control or Power of your Rituals, or for Enchanted Items.

That said, Enchanted Items are still very strong. An item like Harry's duster that provides a substantial block or armor against incoming attacks 3/session can really shore up a caster's otherwise weak defenses.

In general, though, I agree with most, if not all, of the advice given earlier in this thread. Shape-shifters are definitely one of the top competing builds. In fact, anything with access to higher-than-Inhuman on the physical boosting powers is pretty scary. Even just Inhuman Speed and Inhuman Recovery are very powerful - Speed gets you hit a lot less and makes sure you can get wherever you need to go (whether that's positioning in combat, or just overcoming obstacles like walls, pits, fences, etc.), while Recovery almost guarantees you'll be entering most fights with a completely empty consequence list. Ever notice how often Harry is at a disadvantage in the books because he doesn't get a good chance to rest up between action scenes? Now imagine that wasn't ever an issue for him. Scary, ain't it?

Oh, and do NOT underestimate the potential of Sponsored Magic as an alternative to the Focused Practitioner or Wizard route. Yes, it's still a caster, but the flavor can be very different, and the debt mechanic is quite powerful. Really, anything that gets you Fate Points for free (especially compellable aspects that your GM likes to abuse you with) is a pretty substantial advantage in this game.

Offline Taran

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 9859
    • View Profile
    • Chip
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #17 on: March 15, 2013, 07:23:51 PM »
On a more serious note, I'd like to add a clarification to this. As I understand the rules, you have 2 Evocation Focus Item Slots and 2 Thaumaturgy Focus Item Slots, so you can only get +2 to offensive control. The other 2 slots need to be spent on bonuses for Control or Power of your Rituals, or for Enchanted Items.

I agree with this.  It's a bit weird to have foci that come from one power boosting a separate power.

Offline Theonlyspiral

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 305
  • Zealotry in the cause of Justice is no vice...
    • View Profile
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #18 on: March 15, 2013, 07:34:48 PM »
Is there a specific rules quote on that?
Morgan would have done it in 15 books.

Offline Deadmanwalking

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 3534
    • View Profile
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #19 on: March 15, 2013, 07:36:38 PM »
I...I've created some horrid fishy abomination. I'm...proud? Appalled? I'm not really sure.

On a more serious note, I'd like to add a clarification to this. As I understand the rules, you have 2 Evocation Focus Item Slots and 2 Thaumaturgy Focus Item Slots, so you can only get +2 to offensive control. The other 2 slots need to be spent on bonuses for Control or Power of your Rituals, or for Enchanted Items.

Harry's 3 Evocation Focus Items argue that you most certainly can do that as a Wizard, as do the Item Slots descriptions listed under Evocation and Thaumaturgy. The rules-text on Channeling and Ritual is a lot more restrictive, though, so it's possible that the particular build in question would have issues...albeit those would be easily solved by buying a level of Refinement.

Offline Taran

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 9859
    • View Profile
    • Chip
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #20 on: March 15, 2013, 08:35:04 PM »
I guess what I mean by it being weird is if a character starts with Channelling or Evocation and then later takes Ritual, it seems weird that the Ritual Power has suddenly made their Channelling better.  You buy powers individually.  With the exception of Sponsored magic, I always assumed the foci were separate.

I never looked at Harry's character sheet that closely, although I'm fairly certain that many of these example characters don't add up very well.

Once again, I don't think it says anywhere that you can't...although I can't remember if it specifically says you can.  It was just an assumption I've always made.

In regards to Enchanted items, it specifically says you can make any item within the realm of evocation or thaumaturgy.  So I could see a cross-over, I guess.  With that said, If you only own channelling or Evocation, can you make enchanted items that do things only thaumaturgy permits?

Offline Tedronai

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2343
  • Damane
    • View Profile
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #21 on: March 15, 2013, 08:54:00 PM »
All it says that I'm aware of is that you get a certain number of item slots.  There is no clause, explicit or implied, that I'm aware of that limits where or how you can spend them assuming you have the relevant power to spend them on.
Even Chaotic Neutral individuals have to apologize sometimes. But at least we don't have to mean it.
Slough

Dr.FunLove

  • Guest
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #22 on: March 15, 2013, 09:09:32 PM »
I agree with Ted et.al - I found these rules confusing myself but having Evocation and Thaumaturgy simply adds to your Focus Item pool. That is how I have read it.

Offline EdgeOfDreams

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 332
    • View Profile
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #23 on: March 15, 2013, 10:25:33 PM »
I don't actually have a rules reference for the focus slots being separated. That's just the way that always seemed to make sense to me and the people I've played with. Even if it's just a house rule, I feel that enforcing the split does help encourage a little more variety in how spellcasters are built, but this isn't really the thread to be getting into that whole can of beans.

Offline Tedronai

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 2343
  • Damane
    • View Profile
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #24 on: March 15, 2013, 11:25:14 PM »
Houserule as you will.  If it works at your table, then more power to you.
Even Chaotic Neutral individuals have to apologize sometimes. But at least we don't have to mean it.
Slough

Offline Taran

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 9859
    • View Profile
    • Chip
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #25 on: March 15, 2013, 11:29:18 PM »
I don't actually have a rules reference for the focus slots being separated. That's just the way that always seemed to make sense to me and the people I've played with. Even if it's just a house rule, I feel that enforcing the split does help encourage a little more variety in how spellcasters are built, but this isn't really the thread to be getting into that whole can of beans.

It definitely would temper the Uber evoker build, at least a little.

Online Sanctaphrax

  • White Council
  • Seriously?
  • ****
  • Posts: 12403
    • View Profile
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #26 on: March 16, 2013, 12:09:31 AM »
Yeah, it doesn't work like that at all.

That aside, I wouldn't worry about spellcasters being overpowered at 7 Refresh. Your hypothetical character would probably mangle the average Evil Hat sample character, but another Up To Your Waist combat character could give them a really tough fight.

If you want, we can run a test fight. I'll play this dude:

(click to show/hide)

You play your spellcaster. We'll see how it goes.

That seems crazy, crazy strong. Fate dice have excellent central tendency, so what your modified skill is is fairly likely to be what you actually get when you roll. With this character, that would mean a typical combat would be tossing out an attack with Weapon: 3,4,5 and 6 each at 8 to control. (Is that accurate? I believe you get up to your Conviction rating in power for 1 mental stress, with each point of overflow increasing the incoming mental stress by 1. Since once the 1 box is filled in on the character's stress track, a stress 1 hit is just as damaging as a stress 2 hit, and he's got control to spare, he might as well ramp up in power each round).

Yes, that is how it works.

Most casters would have to worry about backlash or fallout if they did that, but your lopsided power/control set-up means you probably won't lose control of your spells even when overcasting.

Offline Wordmaker

  • Conversationalist
  • **
  • Posts: 917
  • Paul Anthony Shortt
    • View Profile
    • Paul Anthony Shortt's Blog
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #27 on: March 19, 2013, 11:08:58 AM »
You'd be amazed how effective non-spellcasters can be in this system.

One True Believer or Champion of God with Righteousness can destroy any supernatural threat if they get hit hard enough. Not to mention that if you take a good, solid church or family home and a couple of True Believers, you've got yourself a veritable fortress against mystical attackers.

A White Court Vampire with their Speed, Strength and Toughness powers all primed can ruin a wizard's day pretty fast.

As always, Aspects are the major balancers in the game. They can make even a Pure Mortal into a powerhouse. It's all about what circumstances are present and what's happening in the story.


Offline Mr. Death

  • Posty McPostington
  • ***
  • Posts: 7965
  • Not all those who wander are lost
    • View Profile
    • The C-Team Podcast
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #28 on: March 19, 2013, 02:48:37 PM »
The problem that all spellcasters have is limited resources--every offensive or defensive option they have has a limited number of uses, whether it be spells or enchanted items.

A wizard might be able to throw out four 8-shift evocations without breaking a sweat, but if the battle lasts more than 4 rounds, he's going to be in trouble. But a half-ogre with Supernatural Strength and Toughness may not have the raw, one-shot power of a wizard, but it can keep smashing things round after round and will take considerable damage before going down.

And the wizard needs prep time to be really effective--the best way a mortal can take on a wizard is to avoid a fair fight entirely. The increased fate point pool can go a long way toward invoking the wizard's aspects, invoking your own, or making declarations to tip the scales in your favor before the wizard has a chance to act.

This system isn't made to have pure mortals trade blows on even footing with heavy supernatural hitters (which is why I'm flatly against all the Weapon Specialization type stunts; pure mortals aren't supposed to be swinging Weapon:5 attacks at a +6 attack skill that easily)--but that isn't the same as saying mortals are ineffective. They just have to take a more indirect route to get there.
Compels solve everything!

http://blur.by/1KgqJg6 My first book: "Brothers of the Curled Isles"

Quote from: Cozarkian
Not every word JB rights is a conspiracy. Sometimes, he's just telling a story.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_T_mld7Acnm-0FVUiaKDPA The C-Team Podcast

Online Sanctaphrax

  • White Council
  • Seriously?
  • ****
  • Posts: 12403
    • View Profile
Re: Making effective PCs that aren't wizards?
« Reply #29 on: March 19, 2013, 09:42:20 PM »
And the wizard needs prep time to be really effective--the best way a mortal can take on a wizard is to avoid a fair fight entirely.

You know, people say this a lot.

But I've never been sure why Wizards are supposed to need prep time. Ritual spells are nice but Evocation is plenty effective without them.

And so far as I can tell Wizards are just as capable of fighting dirty as mortals are.

This system isn't made to have pure mortals trade blows on even footing with heavy supernatural hitters (which is why I'm flatly against all the Weapon Specialization type stunts; pure mortals aren't supposed to be swinging Weapon:5 attacks at a +6 attack skill that easily)--but that isn't the same as saying mortals are ineffective.

Dude.

There are canonical stunts that are like Weapon Specialization except better.

And in a straight-up fight, mortals are actually pretty effective.

What exactly makes you so sure about what the system is intended for?

PS: White Court Vampires are suboptimal, the Righteousness attack is incredibly situational, and Bless This House is rarely useful.