ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: vultur on September 08, 2013, 05:55:12 PM
-
What cost would a Power be that let you cast two evocations in one exchange, like Ivy can? Maybe something like...
Dual Spellcaster [-?]
Your mastery of magic is so complete that you can perform two spells at once.
Musts: Your high concept must justify extremely exceptional magical skill. You must have Evocation.
Benefit: You can cast two evocations in one exchange, but when doing so, you take a -3 penalty to Power and Control for both.
And what about this?
Reality Alteration [-?]
You can perform extremely powerful and complex spells by will alone.
Musts: You must have a high concept reflecting extreme supernatural power (e.g. a Faerie Queen, Dragon, etc.) You must have both Evocation and Thaumaturgy.
Benefit: You can cast all Thaumaturgy with Evocation's methods and speed.
I'm also not sure what really high end physical characters should have. Beyond a certain point, it seems like magic starts to really outstrip other characters. I mean, if I spend 20 Refresh on physical combat, I can get:
Mythic Speed [-6]
Mythic Strength [-6]
Mythic Toughness [-6]
Item of Power [+1]: throwing axes
True Aim [-1]
infinite ammo [-1] (I guess, if Breath Weapon is -2 and it includes Weapon:2, range, and infinite ammo)
Which gives me always-first initiative, Weapon:7 or Weapon:8 attacks at range, at Weapons+1. I could add in an accuracy stunt (if it would stack with True Aim), and a stunt for Weapons defense against bullets and stuff... (or just have Athletics about as high as Weapons). Hulking Size, I guess, but its benefits, to me, barely balance out its detriments... it seems pretty poor for [-2] to me.
Whereas a spellcaster can just keep spending Refinements, with the only caps being equal to Lore on both focus items and specializations...
-
Ivy, mechanically speaking, wasn't really casting multiple spells at once--mechanically, she was just casting one massive block.
As for the second one, honestly, it's something you can kinda do just with high stats, provided you have the Lore to cover the knowledge of the spell, and can pull enough shifts of power and control them all at once without your head popping.
And...honestly, I'm of the opinion that magic is supposed to outstrip physical ability past a certain point. But stunts and just plain high stats, along with healing abilities and extra consequences, would help balance things.
-
I've been toying with this spell casting power, but am still playing with it. I could see this working well with whatever you decide for Dual Spellcasting.
Rote Mastery [-2]
Your mastery of rote spells is so efficient that you do not tire as easily when casting them.
Skills Affected: Conviction, Lore
Effects:
Mind Over Matter - You gain two additional Mental stress boxes that can only be used for rote stress. These two boxes may be used before using your normal Mental stress boxes.
Arcane Intellect - Your lore is considered one step higher when determining the number of rote spells you have access to.
-
I'm not really sure how to price that first one, because it becomes exponentially more powerful as your Evocation gets more powerful.
The second one, I would call -3 or 4.
Also, speaking as a player in a high-refresh game that you're running, vultur, this thread worries me.
(In a good way.)
-
Dual Spellcaster [-?]
Your mastery of magic is so complete that you can perform two spells at once.
Musts: Your high concept must justify extremely exceptional magical skill. You must have Evocation.
Benefit: You can cast two evocations in one exchange, but when doing so, you take a -3 penalty to Power and Control for both.
I don't really like this. Evocation already has spray attacks, after all. And if you're gonna make multiple action rules, I think it's a shame to limit them to spellcasting.
That being said, this looks like a weak 1 Refresh Power to me.
Filling two stress boxes for two accuracy 7 weapon 7 attacks seems worse than filling one stress box for one accuracy 10 weapon 10 attack. I can see some uses for this since you can combine multiple different types of action, but still.
Reality Alteration [-?]
You can perform extremely powerful and complex spells by will alone.
Musts: You must have a high concept reflecting extreme supernatural power (e.g. a Faerie Queen, Dragon, etc.) You must have both Evocation and Thaumaturgy.
Benefit: You can cast all Thaumaturgy with Evocation's methods and speed.
I'd say 2 Refresh.
I'm also not sure what really high end physical characters should have. Beyond a certain point, it seems like magic starts to really outstrip other characters. I mean, if I spend 20 Refresh on physical combat, I can get:
Mythic Speed [-6]
Mythic Strength [-6]
Mythic Toughness [-6]
Item of Power [+1]: throwing axes
True Aim [-1]
infinite ammo [-1] (I guess, if Breath Weapon is -2 and it includes Weapon:2, range, and infinite ammo)
Which gives me always-first initiative, Weapon:7 or Weapon:8 attacks at range, at Weapons+1. I could add in an accuracy stunt (if it would stack with True Aim), and a stunt for Weapons defense against bullets and stuff... (or just have Athletics about as high as Weapons). Hulking Size, I guess, but its benefits, to me, barely balance out its detriments... it seems pretty poor for [-2] to me.
Whereas a spellcaster can just keep spending Refinements, with the only caps being equal to Lore on both focus items and specializations...
Magical attacks eventually outstrip everything else simply because you can spend more Refresh on them. (And you can get +2 to hit with Refinement). The obvious solution is to write more physical attack powers. They don't have to be super-strong, but they have to stack with each other. And at least some have to affect accuracy.
(Supernatural Martial Arts is a decent example of a custom Power that raises the ceiling for physical attacks.)
Outside of attacks, though, physical stuff doesn't directly compete with magic. Speed is good for casters and brawlers alike.
Hulking Size is indeed a bit lame for combat, but the Intimidation boost is pretty strong.
I don't think Infinite Ammo is worth Refresh.
Rote Mastery [-2]
Your mastery of rote spells is so efficient that you do not tire as easily when casting them.
Skills Affected: Conviction, Lore
Effects:
Mind Over Matter - You gain two additional Mental stress boxes that can only be used for rote stress. These two boxes may be used before using your normal Mental stress boxes.
Arcane Intellect - Your lore is considered one step higher when determining the number of rote spells you have access to.
Looks balanced-ish to me.
-
I don't really like this. Evocation already has spray attacks, after all. And if you're gonna make multiple action rules, I think it's a shame to limit them to spellcasting.
That being said, this looks like a weak 1 Refresh Power to me.
Filling two stress boxes for two accuracy 7 weapon 7 attacks seems worse than filling one stress box for one accuracy 10 weapon 10 attack. I can see some uses for this since you can combine multiple different types of action, but still.
Yeah, the goal was to cast a block and an attack, or a maneuver and an attack, or whatever.
I'd say 2 Refresh
Really? That low? I thought that was fairly major...
Magical attacks eventually outstrip everything else simply because you can spend more Refresh on them. (And you can get +2 to hit with Refinement). The obvious solution is to write more physical attack powers. They don't have to be super-strong, but they have to stack with each other. And at least some have to affect accuracy.
(Supernatural Martial Arts is a decent example of a custom Power that raises the ceiling for physical attacks.)
Good point.
-
Really? That low? I thought that was fairly major...
You wrote Aura Of Influence, right? That's even more major, but it's 0 Refresh.
Anyway, Thaumaturgy is 1 Refresh more expensive than Ritual. It seems logical for evo-Thaumaturgy to be 1 Refresh more expensive than evo-Ritual.
And one field of evothaum is about half of what Sponsored Magic gives you for 2 Refresh if you already have Evocation and Thaumaturgy. So one field of evothaum is probably 1 Refresh. Which seems fair, given how useful it usually is.
-
You wrote Aura Of Influence, right? That's even more major, but it's 0 Refresh.
Ah, good point.
Anyway, Thaumaturgy is 1 Refresh more expensive than Ritual. It seems logical for evo-Thaumaturgy to be 1 Refresh more expensive than evo-Ritual.
And one field of evothaum is about half of what Sponsored Magic gives you for 2 Refresh if you already have Evocation and Thaumaturgy. So one field of evothaum is probably 1 Refresh. Which seems fair, given how useful it usually is.
That does make sense.
-
Don't you already get Thaumaturgy as evocation with Soulfire though, since Soulfire gives full thaumaturgy? As an ancillary benefit, no less. Honestly it seems a rather weak 1 Refresh power to me - if I was doing it, I'd make it 0 Refresh but with some drawbacks, like taking a point of stress every time it's used or something.
For the first one, I'd make it one Refresh, since you're already taking a -3 to Control and Power. It makes spray attacks a useful action - provided you already have high control and power - which is it's main benefit IMO, but not that great. Casting an offensive and defensive spell simultaneously seems mechanically suboptimal to just casting one defensive spell with a few shifts put into duration, then letting loose with offensive spells, especially since you're paying stress for both spells. If you think this is too prone to abuse - and I can see why you'd think that - I suggest increasing the penalty (Say to -4 or even -5), and including a one refresh upgrade reducing it to -2.
And one field of evothaum is about half of what Sponsored Magic gives you for 2 Refresh if you already have Evocation and Thaumaturgy. So one field of evothaum is probably 1 Refresh. Which seems fair, given how useful it usually is.
Even with Thaumaturgy and Evocation, Sponsored Magic gives you considerably more than that IIRC.
A little late, I know, but here's my thoughts.
-
I'd personally implement it as follows:
Multi Evoker [-1]
You may split the power of your evocations among multiple distinct effects, making a single control roll for the combined power of all effects. Power devoted to duration is shared by all relevant effects. The targeting interpretation of the control roll is split normally across the distinct attacks per evocation Spray rules.
This doesn't end up boosting pure offense/alpha strike, but should allow a WR 1 attack to be mixed in with a maneuver or block. Note, be very wary about lifting the spray splitting rule (consider power 4 split a a WR 1 direct attack and a WR 1 zone attack).
-
Don't you already get Thaumaturgy as evocation with Soulfire though, since Soulfire gives full thaumaturgy? As an ancillary benefit, no less.
Maybe. It says "...for our current purposes consider it to provide the full range of thaumaturgy spells (those which are agenda-compatible, at any rate)."
It doesn't say anything about evocation's speed and methods, but maybe that's implied?
Honestly it seems a rather weak 1 Refresh power to me - if I was doing it, I'd make it 0 Refresh but with some drawbacks, like taking a point of stress every time it's used or something.
It does seem weak for 1 Refresh, but that drawback wouldn't be enough. If the drawback only applies when you use the Power, then you can just not use the power when it wouldn't be worth it. So there's no reason not to buy the Power.
To balance out a -0 Power that has an actual benefit, you need a drawback that isn't optional.
Even with Thaumaturgy and Evocation, Sponsored Magic gives you considerably more than that IIRC.
It generally gives Ritual, Channelling, evothaum, a sponsored agenda, and some other bonus.
The agenda is cost-neutral, Ritual and Channelling are subsumed by Evocation and Thaumaturgy, and the other bonus is usually worth about 1 Refresh. So 1 Refresh for the evothaum seems reasonable to me.
-
Maybe. It says "...for our current purposes consider it to provide the full range of thaumaturgy spells (those which are agenda-compatible, at any rate)."
It doesn't say anything about evocation's speed and methods, but maybe that's implied?
I thought this just means that instead of Channeling + Ritual, Soulfire gives you Channeling + Thaumaturgy. I don't think it means "all thaumaturgy as evothaum".
Though I don't know why it still costs -3 if you have Evocation and Thaumaturgy, so who knows...
-
Maybe. It says "...for our current purposes consider it to provide the full range of thaumaturgy spells (those which are agenda-compatible, at any rate)."
It doesn't say anything about evocation's speed and methods, but maybe that's implied?
It does seem weak for 1 Refresh, but that drawback wouldn't be enough. If the drawback only applies when you use the Power, then you can just not use the power when it wouldn't be worth it. So there's no reason not to buy the Power.
To balance out a -0 Power that has an actual benefit, you need a drawback that isn't optional.
It generally gives Ritual, Channelling, evothaum, a sponsored agenda, and some other bonus.
The agenda is cost-neutral, Ritual and Channelling are subsumed by Evocation and Thaumaturgy, and the other bonus is usually worth about 1 Refresh. So 1 Refresh for the evothaum seems reasonable to me.
1. Looking through the books, hmm, yes, it isn't explicitly stated.
2. How do you explain things like Cassandra's Tears then?
That said, I get where you're coming from - if made a free power, there's no reason for all casters not to pick it up anyway. Then again, my suggested drawback was just a suggestion. Maybe insetad of costing one stress, it permanently reduces your stress track by 1? After all, such control over magic can't be good for your mental health...
3. I don't think that's how the power breaks down.
Benefits: Standard sponsored magic bene- fits (page 288). Kemmlerian necromancy comes with automatic, additional specializations in necromancy: +1 to control, +1 to complexity, stacking on top of any existing specializa- tions.
Benefits: Standard sponsored magic bene- fits (page 288). Hellfire likes to inflict pain and harm, but isn’t particularly concerned about being controlled; gain a +1 to the power or complexity threshold on any spell intended to inflict stress or consequences
Benefits: Standard sponsored magic benefits (page 288). What particular flavor these benefits take depends on the nature of the place. For example, a ley-line might draw on an ancient Spirit of Decay lurking beneath the fabric of the local Nevernever, allowing entropomantic effects with evocation’s speed and methods. It might offer a +1 to control and complexity for any entropomancy as well
As shown above, since the additional spellcasting benefit is equal to a +1 control and +1 power, stacking with existing specializations, provided you already have at least three points of Refinement (+3/+2/+1) it's just as cost efficient go get sponsored magic as two more points of Refinement. Better, in fact, if your GM rules the benefits of sponsored magic doesn't count against the usual limit from Refinements. And you get all the other benefits of a sponsor. And if you already have more than three Refinements (like almost every statted spellcaster), it's always straight up better to spring for sponsored magic. So, yeah, that benefit by itself is easily worth two Refresh - the other benefits are mostly cost-neutral.
Also, there's this:
“With Evocation’s Methods and Speed”
When you see this phrase in the power sources listed starting on page 290, here’s what it means: Š
-The spell is still limited to line of sight, like evocation. Š
-The spell is cast like evocation: power first, control later, all done in one exchange. Š
-Thaumaturgy’s set of effects are broader-reaching, not constricted by the straight-line force principles of evocation. With the power source, you get access to the listed set of thaumaturgic effects (often a thematic grouping of some sort) as a viable effect of an evocation spell. So you might be able to throw together a small ward quickly, summon a minor creature extra-quick, or cast a curse of decay with the flick of a wrist. In these cases, use what would have been the complexity of the thaumaturgic effect as a guideline for the power of the evocation.
This may seem like a bit of a shell game, since the sets of mechanical effects available to thaumaturgy and evocation are pretty similar, with only a few areas of non-overlap. You’d be mostly right, but for this point: getting a broad range of effects out of evoca- tion is an exercise in creative rationalization. What the power source is offering in this specific case, then, is a broadening of what you don’t have to rationalize. It’s just quickly, easily available to your spellcaster. Combine this with a few mechanical benefits available with each source and it’s a definite upgrade to a character’s arcane options.
In the developer's own words, Thaumaturgy With Evocation’s Methods and Speed is little more than a cool bit of fluff your character gets, that is, cost-neutral. As such, making it cost a whole point of refresh is a bit much.
-
2. How do you explain things like Cassandra's Tears then?
The -2 penalty doesn't only apply when you choose to use Cassandra's Tears. It applies to things you have no control over too.
It's a tiny tiny drawback, but the mechanical benefits of Cassandra's Tears are also incredibly tiny.
3. I don't think that's how the power breaks down.
As shown above, since the additional spellcasting benefit is equal to a +1 control and +1 power, stacking with existing specializations, provided you already have at least three points of Refinement (+3/+2/+1) it's just as cost efficient go get sponsored magic as two more points of Refinement. Better, in fact, if your GM rules the benefits of sponsored magic doesn't count against the usual limit from Refinements. And you get all the other benefits of a sponsor. And if you already have more than three Refinements (like almost every statted spellcaster), it's always straight up better to spring for sponsored magic. So, yeah, that benefit by itself is easily worth two Refresh - the other benefits are mostly cost-neutral.
Kemmlerian Necromancy provides a double share of benefits. I've noted this before, actually...Seelie Magic, Unseelie Magic, Hellfire, and the examples given for Place Of Power all give 1 Refresh of extra stuff, but Kemmlerian Necromancy doesn't conform. You've got to look at the general trend here, rather than the strongest example.
And Kemmlerian Necromancy probably doesn't ignore the pyramid. It "stacks" with other specializations, but I don't think that implies ignoring the pyramid.
In the developer's own words, Thaumaturgy With Evocation’s Methods and Speed is little more than a cool bit of fluff your character gets, that is, cost-neutral. As such, making it cost a whole point of refresh is a bit much.
That very quote calls it "a definite upgrade". That's more or less exactly the opposite of what you claim it says.
Honestly, though, I don't like that sidebar much. It leaves out a lot of important stuff that remains ambiguous, and it overstates the overlap between evocation and thaumaturgy.
-
The -2 penalty doesn't only apply when you choose to use Cassandra's Tears. It applies to things you have no control over too.
It's a tiny tiny drawback, but the mechanical benefits of Cassandra's Tears are also incredibly tiny.
Kemmlerian Necromancy provides a double share of benefits. I've noted this before, actually...Seelie Magic, Unseelie Magic, Hellfire, and the examples given for Place Of Power all give 1 Refresh of extra stuff, but Kemmlerian Necromancy doesn't conform. You've got to look at the general trend here, rather than the strongest example.
And Kemmlerian Necromancy probably doesn't ignore the pyramid. It "stacks" with other specializations, but I don't think that implies ignoring the pyramid.
That very quote calls it "a definite upgrade". That's more or less exactly the opposite of what you claim it says.
Honestly, though, I don't like that sidebar much. It leaves out a lot of important stuff that remains ambiguous, and it overstates the overlap between evocation and thaumaturgy.
Cassandra’s Tears [–0]
Description: You are afflicted by the condition known as Cassandra’s Tears—you have a limited ability to see the future and predict the shape of things to come. But there’s a big downside: most people simply ignore or won’t believe your warnings. Musts: You must take Cassandra’s Tears or some similar variant as an aspect (because it’s going to get compelled—lots).
Skills Affected: Social skills.
Effects: Unbelievable Predictions. You are able to make precognitive predictions or receive them from the GM. This places an aspect on the “world” related to the prediction that remains until it comes true or is otherwise resolved. See the guidelines on page 324 for more details about predictions. Whenever trying to warn people about what you foresee, you are at a –2 to any attempts to convince them that what you’re saying is correct.
1. I'm not seeing how this drawback hits you even if you don't use the power. Unless you've conceded my point about compels not being cost-neutral?
2. Except, as I showed in my quotes, it's not just Kemmlerian Necromancy. It's also Hellfire and Place of Power. And since Seelie and Unseelie Magic essentially give +3 power to offensive evocations against the opposing court, they can be just as good in a game centered around the faerie courts.
And about the specializations thing - I don't think so. It gives a bonus to necromancy- just as Hellfire gives a bonus to spells that harm and the specific Place of Power gives the bonus to entropic effects. Whereas, with Refinement, you have to pick from earth, water, fire, air, or spirit. If you rule that these effects must be part of the pyramid, how on earth do you calculate them? What if you use these effect-based specializations as the base of your pyramid, with element-based specializations on top, and you cast a spell that doesn't have those effects? The only reason to assume they work like Refinement specializations is the use of the word specializations - which doesn't apply to Hellfire or Place of Power anyway.
3. I read it as definite upgrade in the sense Wizard's Constitution and Cassandra's Tears are definite upgrades. The part I was looking at is
What the power source is offering in this specific case, then, is a broadening of what you don’t have to rationalize.
Essentially, an easier time coming up with spell descriptions.
Also, since I'm not seeing it, could you explain how being able to do thaumaturgy effects in combat is actually superior to not being able to?
-
1. I'm not seeing how this drawback hits you even if you don't use the power. Unless you've conceded my point about compels not being cost-neutral?
The -2 penalty isn't part of the Compel, it's part of the Power. It shouldn't be counted as part of a Compel's troublesomeness.
Incidentally, I still don't get what you were talking about re: Compels. Since Compel troublesomeness is totally up to the GM, shouldn't you assume that the GM sets it to whichever amount makes for a balanced game?
2. Except, as I showed in my quotes, it's not just Kemmlerian Necromancy. It's also Hellfire and Place of Power. And since Seelie and Unseelie Magic essentially give +3 power to offensive evocations against the opposing court, they can be just as good in a game centered around the faerie courts.
My apologies, my eyes skipped right over most of your quote. I saw the necromancy bit and somehow managed to miss the rest.
I contend that +1 power +1 control to a specific field is worth 1 Refresh, because that exact effect costs 1 Refresh when you buy it with Refinement. Hellfire's bonus is similar since it applies to both Evocation and Thaumaturgy, though the thaumaturgy bonus is kind of lame.
And about the specializations thing - I don't think so. It gives a bonus to necromancy- just as Hellfire gives a bonus to spells that harm and the specific Place of Power gives the bonus to entropic effects. Whereas, with Refinement, you have to pick from earth, water, fire, air, or spirit.
Nope. Read the book again. Necromancy is a standard Thaumaturgy specialization, and Evocation bonuses are only "usually" elemental.
If you rule that these effects must be part of the pyramid, how on earth do you calculate them? What if you use these effect-based specializations as the base of your pyramid, with element-based specializations on top, and you cast a spell that doesn't have those effects?
The only effect-based specialization is Hellfire's. Which is a bit of an oddity, and which might actually deserve to ignore the pyramid since +1 complexity to hurtful rituals is a pretty uninspiring half-benefit. The others are standard field specializations.
Also, since I'm not seeing it, could you explain how being able to do thaumaturgy effects in combat is actually superior to not being able to?
First of all, you can make multiple Aspects easily with one spell.
Second, you get some weird tricks like being able to arm your friends or summon a monster during a fight. Those tricks can be pretty powerful if your GM is permissive, or pretty weak if they're not.
Third, you can unambiguously make mental attacks and hit skills other than Athletics with your attacks. Whether you can do this with just Evocation is unclear.
Fourth, you can replace skills in combat time. So if you need to outrun a monster or unlock a door while being shot at, you can use a spell to do it.
Fifth, you can increase the accuracy of your attacks by taking backlash. Usually won't be worth sacrificing your weapon rating, but options are good.
Sixth, you can do more and weirder stuff to your opponents. Evocation almost certainly can't turn enemies into slaves, evothaum can.
Seventh, you can cast rituals in quick succession while doing other stuff. If you can casually crank out 7 shifts of summoning evothaum, you can make four 7-shift creatures per scene of talking. Just take a minute or two for a "smoke break" and cast four spells.
Eighth, you can boost your complexity for a ward or whatever by taking stress. If you need to cast something a couple of points over your base complexity without too much fuss, this can be handy.
Ninth, you may have a better power for evothaum than you have complexity for rituals. Especially if your GM makes you use Evocation specializations with evothaum.
I could probably come up with more, but nine points seems like enough. Many of these are minor, but collectively they're definitely worth Refresh.
-
Apologies for late reply. I was extremely busy with exams these last few weeks and they only just finished - on my birthday, too! :D
1. I was referring to the fact that if you just not talk about your visions, the drawback doesn't hit you at all. Likewise if you just ignore them outright. Having C'sT is strictly superior to not having it in that regard.
And yeah, that's pretty much my stance on compels now. Kinda. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure what you're getting at.
2. What happened to keeping context in mind and not balancing things in a silo? That's what you get with Refinement, yes, but only once. After that, it's sharply diminishing returns. But as I think you pointed out, this ultimately falls down to a GM ruling, since Evil Hat refuses to clarify stuff like this.
3. I think I get where you're coming from. We're just going to have to disagree, since this is yet another thing where different assumptions can't be conclusively resolved. With regards to your 8th point though, declarations are free, and are as simple as rolling a skill. This is one of those few statements conclusively supported by the book.
-
1. Gonna be honest, I don't really remember what I was getting at with the Compel thing. It's been a while. Sorry about that.
Anyway, I think never talking about your visions is probably a drawback in its own right. Though this does depend on the same assumptions I was making earlier in the thread.
2. I am keeping context in mind. But I'm operating under the interpretation that specializations from Sponsored Magic must obey normal pyramid rules.
3. Yes, Declarations are free. But that doesn't mean that complexity bonuses are worthless.
-
3. Yes, Declarations are free. But that doesn't mean that complexity bonuses are worthless.
You have to admit though, they come ridiculously close. Speaking of which, I've been toying with some houserules for restoring value to thaumaturgic bonuses that actually make them worth half a refresh each. If I end up posting it later, would you mind taking a look at them?
-
Sure, I'd be glad to look at your houserules.
-
Since I can't make the full mini-essay on this I wanted, I'd just post the general idea I had here.
Basically, excess complexity reduces control. For every multiple of your base complexity beyond the first, you suffer a cumulative -1 penalty to your control roll. Base complexity is calculated by taking your Lore (or other skill if you have a stunt that swaps it out) and adding foci and specialization bonuses, in addition to anything other bonuses granted by stunts or powers. Basically, if you paid refresh for it, it counts as a bonus to base complexity.
For example, Voormas the wizard had a Lore and Discipline of 4, a focus granting +1 control and complexity to entropy rituals, and a +2 complexity bonus to entropy rituals from Refinement. He also has an essentially infinite number of declarations to make, since they're free. There fore, his base complexity is 7, and control is 5. He can thus use complexity 7 rituals pretty much at will, so long as he is careful to add only one shift of complexity an exchange. How ever, once his complexity gets into the 8-14 range through the use of declarations or taking consequences, he now has to deal with a control of just 4, meaning that even if he somehow only adds one shift an exchange, there is now a chance (approximately 1/81, just enough to make it risky but not overly so) that he will roll a -4, resulting in the ritual blowing up in his face. It gets exponentially worse once the ritual gets a complexity of 15-21, with a -2 penalty, and so on.
The intent behind this is such: This way, bonuses to thaumaturgy control and complexity are actually useful. RAW, once control gets to 5, other boosts are pretty much worthless. Complexity bonuses are never worth it, since you can just keep rolling declarations. This negates those points - control now serves as a soft cap on how powerful your rituals can get - fitting perfectly into the fluff -and complexity bonuses are still incredibly useful as a force multiplier, even with infinite declarations. Better still, due to the way the mechanics interact, both are arguably equal to each other at all points, since effective max complexity is (control-4) x base complexity, with the option to use fate points to take it further. Therefore, for the best results, roughly equal weight needs to be given to both control and complexity (with perhaps a slightly greater emphasis on control at the beginning).
This also allows for the GM to keep with the book's idea of double-digit complexity rituals as being powerful, without having to worry about the ease with which spellcasters can achieve them RAW. It also free him to establish harder, crunchier rules for what thaumaturgy can do, such as your custom summoning houserules, without worrying too much about the casters abusing them by maxing out complexity to unreasonable levels. Furthermore, it allows thaumaturgy-focused builds to be a valid choice - for example, to make a Binder-style character with a bunch of stunts and powers boosting summoning control and complexity, to truly build Binder as portrayed in the book, without making a build that is either horribly suboptimal or far more powerful than Binder is shown as.
Lastly, it serves to keep thaumaturgy as a powerful force, capable of literally anything as described, while also giving a good justification for why the Council (and PC spellcasters), don't just outright own the world, but still letting them keep the ability to "take the kid gloves off", as Mr Butcher describes.
So, what do you think?
-
I like it.
It addresses a number of thaumaturgy's most significant issues, and does so elegantly. Combine this with an "adventure" option for building complexity, some guidelines for how long rituals should take, and maybe some limitations on complexity-building Declarations/consequences, and you'd have a really nice set of ritual rules.
PS: The summoning rules aren't supposed to be strict, for what it's worth. Ideally the GM will adjust the complexities to accommodate heavily optimized/totally unoptimized summons.
-
Glad to know you approve.
I did have a number of ancillary ideas regarding those, which I was going to put in that mini-essay I mentioned, but given that they didn't deviate that much from the core rules - and they were already plenty of such floating around - I decided they were unimportant. Also, part of what these rules were supposed to do was to make it so that free, unlimited declarations were no longer the big issue they were before. I suppose if you wanted to make it so that taking consequences to boost complexity is a valid choice, you could make it so that complexity from willingly-inflicted consequences doesn't count for the purpose of determining your penalty, and doesn't suffer the penalty. Forcibly-inflicted consequences should probably be treated similarly to declarations. Still a valid route to power for the lazy or unskilled, but not the game-breaking plot devices they were before.
And yes, I knew that. It's just that if loose enough, guidelines become useless - the GM might as well make it up on the spot. My biggest grudge with freeform games is how quickly they devolve into Mother May I with the GM as Mother, which is the source of my biggest disappointment with the thaumaturgy mechanics. I was hoping to use these houserules to eventually reach a spot where hard, solid rules could be used for a variety of effects, with only minimal GM intervention needed. Still a long way off, but every bit helps.
-
I've got similar issues with Thaumaturgy.
I don't mind a bit of Mother May I, but if that's what Thaumaturgy is then there's no reason to spend so much effort writing and reading and using its mechanics. Mother May I should be kept simple, as in "the GM determines which Aspect invocations are valid".
This does do a lot to make infinite Declarations less problematic, but I like having the task of building complexity be an actual task. Right now one of my players in EtA is working on a massive ritual that will save Berlin from an army of demons, and I'm glad that he's not just sitting back and rolling Declarations endlessly. Instead he's running a life energy donation drive, which is much more interesting.
-
I always figured there should be a cap to the complexity you can get by regular Declarations ... above that you have to put in consequences or take sponsor debt*, or... Probably a multiple of Lore, or of Lore+Discipline. Maybe 4 x Lore, or 2 x (Lore+Discipline)?
*With the right justification (eg traveling to a place of power or bargaining with a powerful being), I'd say you could take a point or two of sponsor debt without actually having a Sponsored Magic power, as a one-time-only thing (just standing on Chichen Itza wouldn't let you cast empowered spells over and over - just like how Harry did that crazy gravity spell in Changes, then didn't draw on the ley line for the rest of the fight.)
---
Anyway, another weird power.
Self-Focusing Magic [-?]
Your magic is so perfectly focused that focus items would be redundant.
Musts: You need item slots granted by a spellcasting power to take this power. Also, you need major justification from your High Concept -- maybe you're the Archive, for example, or the Genius Loci of Edinburgh.
Effects: Instead of creating focus items, you can use your item slots to grant yourself bonuses just like those that would be provided by focus items. These bonuses aren't tied to physical items and are always available. You can only reassign these bonuses when you could change normal focus items.
You can still use your focus item slots to create enchanted items; these work normally.
That part is simple enough, but how do I put in something equivalent to the item-size limit of regular focus items?
And what should this cost?
On the advantage side, you can't ever be without your foci, or have them removed or broken or stolen. On the other hand, if your foci are rings, you can pretty much have them on 24/7 anyway, and Harry having to check his staff at the door is probably a Compel. So 0 or -1, maybe even 0.
-
I always figured there should be a cap to the complexity you can get by regular Declarations ... above that you have to put in consequences or take sponsor debt*, or... Probably a multiple of Lore, or of Lore+Discipline. Maybe 4 x Lore, or 2 x (Lore+Discipline)?
*With the right justification (eg traveling to a place of power or bargaining with a powerful being), I'd say you could take a point or two of sponsor debt without actually having a Sponsored Magic power, as a one-time-only thing (just standing on Chichen Itza wouldn't let you cast empowered spells over and over - just like how Harry did that crazy gravity spell in Changes, then didn't draw on the ley line for the rest of the fight.)
---
Anyway, another weird power.
Self-Focusing Magic [-?]
Your magic is so perfectly focused that focus items would be redundant.
Musts: You need item slots granted by a spellcasting power to take this power. Also, you need major justification from your High Concept -- maybe you're the Archive, for example, or the Genius Loci of Edinburgh.
Effects: Instead of creating focus items, you can use your item slots to grant yourself bonuses just like those that would be provided by focus items. These bonuses aren't tied to physical items and are always available. You can only reassign these bonuses when you could change normal focus items.
You can still use your focus item slots to create enchanted items; these work normally.
That part is simple enough, but how do I put in something equivalent to the item-size limit of regular focus items?
And what should this cost?
On the advantage side, you can't ever be without your foci, or have them removed or broken or stolen. On the other hand, if your foci are rings, you can pretty much have them on 24/7 anyway, and Harry having to check his staff at the door is probably a Compel. So 0 or -1, maybe even 0.
Internalized Foci has already been determined to be a [-1] power (you really should check out the Worm thread).
-
Well, "determined" is a strong word. I'm still not totally confident that that's the right cost.
But I think 1 Refresh and no focus size limit is appropriate. The focus size limits were never very important compared to the Lore cap, after all.
Incidentally, I'd be interested in hearing vultur's opinion on the Worm thread. Particularly on the new Powers for the Siberian. Even if he doesn't know who the Siberian is, he knows the DFRPG rules so he should be able to contribute.
-
OK, I'm working my way through the Worm thread.