Exploring Thaumaturgy

[Richard_Chilton]

Just a bit of a thought about Thaumaturgy.  Rules wise anyone with it can (in theory) do practically anything - yet in the books Harry is always going on about its limitations.  How your magic can't don't anything that isn't somehow part of you.  For example, no one can summon a pain demon unless they have that pain inside of them and can envision the demon, at least not instinctively.  There are books and such that contain rituals, names, etc, to summon demons - allowing you to do things that aren't necessarily part of you - but for the most part if it's not part of you then you can't do it.  Mr. "Happy Go Lucky" Wizard isn't going to start throwing pain curses any more than Mr. "Sour Because the Red Court Bit My Girlfriend" Wizard can do something cheerful - like capturing sunlight.

Just wondering if we shouldn't advise people to sit down and work out, well, call it a personal paradigm of what their magic can do.  What sorts of Thaumaturgy they can do without a teacher, rare books, or expanding (or shifting) their worldview.

Just a thought.

Richard

[EdgeOfDreams]

It's an interesting idea, but I've never run into this as a problem in my games.  My feeling would be to say that if the GM or another player thinks a certain ritual is inappropriate for the character, there should be a compel on a suitable aspect.

For example, if your high concept is, in fact, "Angst-Ridden Orphan Wizard", that's an easy compel to NOT be able to capture sunshine in a hankie.

Discussing with the GM what kinds of magic you expect to be able to do is definitely a good idea, but I don't think there needs to be a specific list of "I can't do magic X because of event Y in my backstory and personality trait Z".  And if a character is *very* limited in what kinds of rituals he can perform, well, that's what Ritual(blah) and Sponsored Magic are for.

[Tedronai]

I should think that simply playing to one's aspects should generally provide sufficient guidance, here.

[Todjaeger]

Two things.  First, when I read the topic, I misread it as "Exploding Thaumaturgy" which gave the topic an entirely different spin until I realized my mistake.

Secondly, how much of a real issue are Thaumaturgy themes really going to be?  I can certainly understand how the hanky full of sunshine can be an issue for some, since it requires capturing a happy moment.  That itself should be fairly easily compelled to control who can do it and when.  Yes that means you emo sorcerer. 

From what I've seen in play, one of the real limitations players are going to run into with Thamaturgy is their own imaginations.  Case in point, a one shot game I ran at a convention involved a war party of Wardens descending on a city to hunt down a source of black magic.  All the players except one were familiar with the Dresden Files novels, and all of them were also familiar with the DFRPG.  They managed to find a portion of the diary of the person they were looking for, but completely forgot about using Divination to locate the other half of the book.  Instead they were trying to break into a school office to go through the records...  Ignoring the fact that all such things are computerized now...

Given how basic Divination is, and how often Harry uses it in the novels...  For a party to completely forget that is an option for them suggests that players will have 'favorite' rituals which they'll use regularly, otherwise they'll likely not get too creative.

-Cheers

[UmbraLux]

Just wondering if we shouldn't advise people to sit down and work out, well, call it a personal paradigm of what their magic can do.  What sorts of Thaumaturgy they can do without a teacher, rare books, or expanding (or shifting) their worldview.

One method of doing this without sitting down to create another list would be to simply require the thaumaturgist to tag / invoke one or more personal aspects when casting.  That said, I tend to do just the opposite - I compel if I don't think the spell fits what they can do. 

The disadvantage to creating a list / paradigm ahead of time is in envisioning situations.  If not writing it down at character creation means not being able to cast it you end with the choice of trying to make a comprehensive list or being potentially gimped.  Using existing aspects avoids that...whichever way you use them. 

[Vairelome]

I'm a big fan of practitioners creating a "magical style" aspect, as suggested in the Blind Spots sidebar on YS179.  Examples are Harry's "Not So Subtle, Still Quick To Anger" and Molly's "Subtlety Is Its Own Power."  Remember that a personal aspect isn't just the phrase itself, it's also a contextual explanation that players are encouraged to work out with their GMs, so the GM has a better idea of when and where to provide the opportunity for compels and invocations.  See "Getting on the Same Page," YS112.

Richard, do you think this would be adequate to your needs, or were you intending something more comprehensive?

[Silverblaze]

Just a bit of a thought about Thaumaturgy.  Rules wise anyone with it can (in theory) do practically anything - yet in the books Harry is always going on about its limitations.  How your magic can't don't anything that isn't somehow part of you.  For example, no one can summon a pain demon unless they have that pain inside of them and can envision the demon, at least not instinctively.  There are books and such that contain rituals, names, etc, to summon demons - allowing you to do things that aren't necessarily part of you - but for the most part if it's not part of you then you can't do it.  Mr. "Happy Go Lucky" Wizard isn't going to start throwing pain curses any more than Mr. "Sour Because the Red Court Bit My Girlfriend" Wizard can do something cheerful - like capturing sunlight.

Just wondering if we shouldn't advise people to sit down and work out, well, call it a personal paradigm of what their magic can do.  What sorts of Thaumaturgy they can do without a teacher, rare books, or expanding (or shifting) their worldview.

Just a thought.

Richard

I genuinely like where you are going with this.  It fits the theme of the books very well and forces people to think about who the character is deep down inisde and how it effects the spells he/she casts.  it will be good for roleplaying as well as flavoring the thaumaturgy and adding an inherent check/balance system.

However...

 I think a combination of players and GM policing the situation in which thaumaturgy is being used works better than compiling a list at the start of the game.  Using aspects and compelling or "counter compelling" works well too...also flavor aspects done to alter how the PC/NPC casts spells works well too.  hence my reasoning for requiring a combination to solve the issue.  Ultimately, it comes down to one major reason.

Character developement.

Characters can change.  Loved ones die, tragedy strikes this is common.  People in RL get jaded.  It is a natural flow for some characters to also.  The reverse is also true.  I have had large events change me for the better and became a genuinely happier person.  I assume this is not an isolated case.  Other people likely experience it also..hence characters can too.  Therefore, the PC who originially would not summon pain demons...could now do so regularly. 

Also, the list lengthens character creation even more and I don't like that.

EDIT: I think all players should be able to think about this and keep it in mind all on their own. (assuming they understand that aspect of magic due to the novels)  It is all a part of having a fleshed out character.