Enchanted Items Patch - Important, holy crap!

[Belmonte]

I admit, I'm not sure I like the idea of -everything- being unable to be made 'always on'.  There's a difference between systematically always on and in-setting.  The books never even imply that Harry's coat is limited use, unlike his rings, which definitely are.  Just that he has top off the enchantment every once in a while.

But we'll see how it works out.

[Archmage_Cowl]

okay thanks. but now ill have all my teamates wanting me to let them borrow my enchanted wizard robes for the session lol

[Deadmanwalking]

I admit, I'm not sure I like the idea of -everything- being unable to be made 'always on'.  There's a difference between systematically always on and in-setting.  The books never even imply that Harry's coat is limited use, unlike his rings, which definitely are.  Just that he has top off the enchantment every once in a while.

But we'll see how it works out.

See, I like it. Especially the bit with taking Mental Stress to give them extra uses. It allows appropriately powerful "always on" items, like the Warden's Swords or Harry's coat (which were both way less cool than they should've been in the previous version). If you want an effect to be really always on, buy alot of uses, then take the stress to have it work every time you need to thereafter.

[LCDarkwood]

I admit, I'm not sure I like the idea of -everything- being unable to be made 'always on'.  There's a difference between systematically always on and in-setting.  The books never even imply that Harry's coat is limited use, unlike his rings, which definitely are.  Just that he has top off the enchantment every once in a while.

I disagree. The need for periodic re-enchantment implies that eventually, the magic on the coat would dissipate. That directly suggests limited usage of some kind between "recharging" periods.

Also, Jim has the advantage of being able to cheat for the sake of narrative convenience because he's writing a novel. That isn't a criticism, just a fact. There's plenty of evidence in the setting that one way or another, you always have to pay up: everything uses energy, and energy has to come from somewhere. In truth, the coat is just a plot device that lets him justify Harry not being hurt without breaking our suspension of disbelief. He doesn't have to worry about the particulars. We emphatically do.

If you want a true-blue "always on" item, there's a category for that: they're called Items of Power. You want a coat that cannot be burned out, you take an Item of Power with Toughness. Simple as that. (Also, one of the reasons why we had to take Permissions out, so people could make choices like that.)

And frankly, it isn't hard to get enough uses for a particular item that it feels like it's always on, unless you go out of your way to use it. I mean, how many times in a session is your defense roll and your shield spell going to fail simultaneously, and you're not going to have fate points to potentially cover the gap? Even Harry doesn't rely on his duster 100% of the time.

So I think it tracks in every way I want it to.

[Wyrdrune]

there's one thing I do not understand in this change (or maybe I have missed this): with the new rules and more uses, defensive items can be a block or an armor.

if that wasn't changed then following rules are in use: if a block is overcome it winks out. if a armor is overcome it still stays in place (to the end of the spell's duration).

in the new use-based system I see no "need" for the armor effect. take the "block 8 or armor 4" example. if I am hit, it uses a charge and I can decide to block with 8 or have armor with 4. since the block would allow me to entire avoid the damage, most people would take the block. or can I decide, after the charge is triggered that for the current encounter I have block 4 for 4 excanges or an armor of 2 for 2 exchanges? I mean could you divide the power of the block/armor on duration after triggering? (then armor would still make sense.)

[Deadmanwalking]

Put simply: You use Armor after you've already tried defenses and they are insufficient, or if the Block wouldn't be enough to stop the attack.

An example:

Harry uses his shield bracelet and Spirit Evocation to get a full 6 shifts of Block going, unfortunately he's dealing with someone more powerful than him (again) and the attack coming at him is a 7 Shift Fire Evocation (and thus Weapon: 7). Not wanting to take the 8 Stress this attack will deal him, he activates his Duster for Armor 2, taking only a 6 stress hit, which he reduces to a 4 stress hit by taking a minor physical consequence.

This reduced the consequence he needed to take by a whole level, and the Block would've been useless (since they don't stack, you just use the highest).

Another example:

Harry is caught unprepared by a thug with a gun and has no chance to use his active magic to defend himself. The thug gets lucky and manages a Superb attack roll. Harry only manages a Good dodge roll. Now, the Duster could reduce the damage of the attack by one by replacing the dodge roll, but it couldn't stop it...and it can reduce it by 2 instead if used as armor, so that's what it does, leaving Harry to take only a 2 stress hit (assuming a reasonable handgun).



The armor being available gives you options, which is exactly what you want from the kind of last-ditch protective measures most defensive items are going to be (limited use things should basically never be your first line of defense).

[Korwin]

This is my leading assumption - that it's a two-slot item constructed at Great Lore with extra frequency.

As a one-slot item, either it just works once a session, or gives Fair / Armor:1 three times a session.

Reducing item strength for extra uses is 1:1. Using a whole slot for extra uses is 2:1, to create an incentive for doing so.

Are we talking Focus Item Slot or Enchanted Item Slots?

For an Refinement I could get two Specialisations +1 Item Power and +1 Frequency or I could get 2 Focus Item Slots or 4 Enchanted Item Slots?
I will asume we are talking Focus Item Slots (otherwise it gets into crazy town).

I use one Focus Item Slot for Power, the other Item Slot for Frequency for two extra uses.
Is that intentional? Its better to use the Refinement ability for extra Item Slots, than for Specialisations.

If we are talking about multiple Refinement abilities used for crafting it gets worse, because you cant stack the Specialistion boni that fast (you need a +1 for every +2).

Reread first post

You can also add additional item slots to frequency, to give you an additional two uses per session. The original extra slot benefits of +1 strength and new item still apply.

So we are talking Item Slots…

So for on Refinement ability you can get +1 to Power and +6 to freqency.
Is that your intention?

[Deadmanwalking]

Remember Crafting Specialties in Frequency and Strength apply to all items made individually, so if you have enough items, they start being very good indeed.

You need a whole two enchanted items for Crafting Strength to break even (it provides +1 Lore to two items...exactly like two enchanted item slots), and three for it to become cheaper. This becomes a whole four items on Frequency (it provides a total of four extra uses to items...exactly like two enchanted item slots), and five for it to become cheaper.

The Crafting specialties are mainly for people with their power distributed among a variety of items rather than for people with one or two really big ones. Those folks are indeed better served by acquiring item slots.

[Korwin]

Thanks. That makes sense.

[Deadmanwalking]

Thanks. That makes sense.

No problem, happy to help.

[iago]

there's one thing I do not understand in this change (or maybe I have missed this): with the new rules and more uses, defensive items can be a block or an armor.

if that wasn't changed then following rules are in use: if a block is overcome it winks out. if a armor is overcome it still stays in place (to the end of the spell's duration).

in the new use-based system I see no "need" for the armor effect. take the "block 8 or armor 4" example. if I am hit, it uses a charge and I can decide to block with 8 or have armor with 4. since the block would allow me to entire avoid the damage, most people would take the block. or can I decide, after the charge is triggered that for the current encounter I have block 4 for 4 excanges or an armor of 2 for 2 exchanges? I mean could you divide the power of the block/armor on duration after triggering? (then armor would still make sense.)

So, first off, we're definitely coding in that you can't stack things like armor. So that plays into this thinking.  If you had a shield bracelet too, say, and you threw up a Armor:3 shield and something blasted through it, and you're wearing a coat that's Armor:2, that additional protection isn't going to pay off.  And it's already clear that it's only the best block action you have that applies, they don't stack either.  But being able to frame each of these effects differently means you can get the best of both.  You throw up a block effect with your shield (or your coat) and then follow with an armor effect from your coat (or your shield), and you're golden.  That's really the only way to get good layered protection going: block, then armor.

Going further, yeah, you could define an Armor effect -- like any evocation effect -- with a few shifts of the casting strength put towards duration.  So let's say you've got a Strength 4 armored whatsit.  That could be Armor:2 for one exchange (a 4 shift spell effect); or it could be Armor:1 for 3 exchanges (2 shifts for Armor:1, 2 shifts for +2 exchanges of duration). And as you note, the armor won't collapse if overcome, like a block would regardless of the duration put on it.

So ultimately the way I'd roll: I'm Harry. My coat gives me a solid Block action when I don't have other protections up -- someone drives by, I'm unaware, they open fire, yay coat! If they don't roll to meet or beat its block strength, no damage at all. If they do, well the attack connects but at least it's mitigated a bit over my completely flatfooted surprised Mediocre defense.

Now I'm in the scrum: I'm calling up a shield effect because, whoa doggies, they're coming at me with everything they've got.  Shield goes up, maybe at max power, I'm defending with a Superb block.  Disaster! They hit me with an Fantastic (+7) attack. 1 shift is getting through and it's Weapon:3 -- I'm going to take 4 stress. But I've got an armored coat under there. I use it to get me the extra protection of (say) Armor:2, and it's only 2 stress. Good news, because I have a feeling I'm gonna need that #4 physical stress box before the fight's over.

[svb1972]

Am I the only one to notice that the Coat.. seems to take some power from Harry while he's wearing it.
When he gets shot in the coat, especially seriously shot, it seems to have the same drain effect as when he uses his shield?

Is it possible that his coat would, just be a coat if he wasn't wearing it?

IE:
Is it possible that Harry's not actually making a self-enclosed Magical item?  But instead is making an always on, 0 concentration required, highly 'mana' efficient enchantment that only works when he's wearing the coat?

[iago]

Is it possible that his coat would, just be a coat if he wasn't wearing it?

Thomas has run around in the coat before. It seems to be implied he's expecting and receiving protection while wearing it. FWIW.

[LCDarkwood]

That's really the only way to get good layered protection going: block, then armor.

Also, having both effects helps minimize the wizard getting screwed when people decide to invoke/tag aspects against them in a fight.

If I'm the GM, and someone decides to throw up their defensive item block, and I invoke some aspects to hit them anyway, they still have the option to say, "Oh, damn, well, I'm gonna use it as Armor, then" if they want.

[flymolo]

What's the duration for something like a veil?

Veil Coat (Superb lore)
+5 block vs. perception
1/session
1 slot
but for how long?

I was modeling off Thaumaturgy and figure it's one scene per session, but based on this I'm thinking it only lasts until someone tries to see through it?