Taking the same power twice?

[Korwin]

Not all elements can mimik all other elements.

Spirit can do all things the other elements can do, but the other elements cant do the special things Spirit can do.

On the whole I agree with John Galt --> just take Spirit.
With Spirit/Force you can explain/do it.


That leaves situations, like the Wizard is low on Fate-Points and uses Fire for collateral damage, compelling himself to setting the building on fire...

[John Galt]

Doc- you're not really getting it.  I'm not talking about narrative effects, but MECHANICAL.  Your hydromancer could use water to apply a "soaked" aspect that you tag for a penalty to movement speed, while my biomancer does the same thing with "tremors" or "grasping plants". 

Gruff- please continue to argue with ad hominems and personally insult me.  When you get banned, maybe the rest of us can have a rational discussion.

Korwin - Earth is at least as versatile as spirit.   Electromagnetic waves, gravity and the earth...

[Da_Gut]

Spirit is the catch all category. A Kinetomancer for example (Channeling limited to spirit), can use spirit to emulate telekinesis, but can't affect ghosts. An ectomancer, on the other hand, could affect ghosts and spirits all day long, but couldn't do much to influence physical objects. On paper, they would look identical (Channeling - Spirit), but just because the game rules are too coarse to represent this, doesn't mean that the difference isn't there.

[Mickey Finn]

*starts prepping the fire extinguishers*

[Doc Nova]

Spirit/Force is never going to apply a "Drenched" aspect like water can.  Sure, I might get drenched in ectoplasm (ick!) but that is not the same thing.  Setting fires with spirit may be possible with really intense light, but it's going to take much greater power than a low-level fire spell (i.e. more shifts to pull it off).  Certainly, many of the effects of air could be mimicked by spirit/force, as it could many of earth's effects, but I'd argue that spirit could never disintegrate the way water can (maybe, if we got into hyper-telekinetic control on a molecular level...but wow...talk about over-the-top).

And applying aspects, and adjudicating what those aspects mean and what they effect is mechanical, not just narrative.

I guess what it boils down to, for me anyway, is this:

I would never let the idea that there is "one overriding element that does it all" fly in my game.  That rings heavily of "finding a cheat", something that takes away the fun from the table...again, for me.  We could debate the quality of elements all day long, but in the end, what really matters (for me) is keeping the game entertaining, diverse, and exciting.  Giving any single element or specialization the "I Win!" button works against those goals, thus it will never happen in my game.  If having an uber element works for your game, where every other caster that bothers looking at another element is doing so out of sympathy or concept, and not backed by mechanics at the table, then groovy, have at it, I truly and genuinely hope you have fun playing that way.  But that's not how the rules are written, mechanically or thematically, as I read them.  Justifications can allow for a great deal, but if the BS gets too deep, I have no problem in calling it, especially to help ensure that elemental specializations keep their diversity and teeth.

[CMEast]

In theory, you can produce lasers with spirit, or transfer heat with fire but I think you have to have the scholarship to understand that, in the same way that you need to be a skilled surgeon before you can use biomancy for anything but the first step on to the road to recovery. Without that knowledge I would allow only the more obvious or traditional uses for the elements.

Someone that understands the idea of fire on an instinctive rather than academic level isn't going to see rapid oxidisation as a result of a chemical process, they are going to see it's heat and hunger, it's destructive nature and it's warmth. In the same way while lightning is a combination of earth and air it is traditionally associated with lightning and so I would allow a focused practitioner of air to cast it without scholarship but not an earth channeller.

Aside from scholarship, I'd allow a fire mage to freeze something but only by channelling the heat in a powerful blast of fire, just like Harry did.

After all, there are 4 elements, plus spirit; not 118. Magic isn't science.

[Doc Nova]

That's an interesting condition to include, CMEast, and not one with which I would disagree.  The notion of surgical education is supported in-game, either in the main text or in the margins, although precisely where I can not remember.  I'd likely rule the same way.  It supports the notion of justification with an in-game "prerequisite", making the effects a tad more expensive (via skill selection, if nothing else) to justify than simply because the player knows something.

Now, I suppose the next question concerning that condition would be:  At what skill level is someone considered a "skilled surgeon"?  Is it simply an aspect somewhere on their character sheet ("Wizard, M.D." perhaps?) or an actual skill that should hit a minimum skill level?  Would you consider someone with Scholarship at Fair as enough, or would any level Scholarship work provided they had the mortal stunt of Doctor or Scientist?

[wyvern]

That probably depends on your game; I'd tend to say that you need at least an effective +3 before you can consider yourself a "skilled surgeon" - but, if you're looking at a wizard, I'd rather sink a stunt into shifting the medical knowledge / care trapping of scholarship over to lore before I just bought up scholarship or spent a stunt on Doctor or somesuch.  Maybe call it "Expert Herbalist" or "Chi Flow Surgeon" or something, depending on exactly how your character looks at healing people.

[John Galt]

Doc, you've still missed my point completely.

CMEast- I like your approach as a House Rule.   How about dividing each element into "applications " and letting the player have applications equal to his scholarship?   

[Doc Nova]

John, I've not missed your point, I just completely disagree.  You want it your way in your game, go for it; I won't tell you how to run your game and you certainly won't tell me how to run mine.  The rules, as written, from my perspective, do not support what you are saying.  Aspects are mechanics. Elements are different in the aspects they allow without stretching justifications.

Quite simply, we disagree.  However, this argument produces nothing positive, so I am done participating in it.

[CMEast]

I think I'd personally go for a more narrative way of doing it, basing it on the characters aspects and it's Scholarship/Lore/Discipline. For instance a 'doctor' with no Scholarship would be a self-deluded quack that can barely tie it's own shoelaces together, let alone cast complicated biomantic rituals. On the other hand I'd perhaps allow a Chinese medicine man with background in acupuncture and a high Lore to heal/augment the body with appropriately themed rituals.

In the same way, a scientist with a background in physics and chemistry whose latent power was discovered late in life (thus putting paid to any career involving complicated lab equipment) might well be able to form laser beams with spirit magic but only if he had a high enough discipline and, if he had a low conviction, perhaps he'd struggle with the brute force aspects like telekinesis. Generally the difference between a laser beam and a kinetic strike is purely narrative, but it'd make a difference when he's trying to pick up some keys from the other side of the room or fighting winter court Hobs.

However it totally depends on each persons game and if you want to break down the elements in to their different applications and the complexity level of each effect then be my guest, I'd be very interested in the results For instance using water magic to create phosphorus would be a neat trick!

[LCDarkwood]

Doc's already backed out of the thread, but Galt, Gruff, watch your respective tones, please.

Thanks.

[GruffAndTumble]

Doc's already backed out of the thread, but Galt, Gruff, watch your respective tones, please.

Thanks.

I'm going to drop it as well. I've laid out my point of view, and I should have stopped there.

[Magus Black]

Since the topic already exist I might as well ask it now (hopefully this wont count as derailment), on them matter of taking two of the same power.

Can you take (and would you consider it fair/legitimate) Physical Immunity twice and would the normal rules for stacked catches still apply?

[luminos]

You take physical immunity once, and that covers everything.  What you are asking is about taking physical immunity with more than one catch.  The answer is yes, but you only get the discount from the catch that gives the biggest rebate, and all the catches count.  Or you want to have multiple catches that have to each be satisfied to get past the physical immunity, which would only get a discount from how likely the combined catches would hurt you.  So research would be based on how hard it is to find out about both of the catches together, and applicability would be based on how easy it would be to obtain and use both catches at once.