Focused Practitioner vs Wizard

[Quazar]

As you have it, a character with Channeling is better at evoking their element then a specialized Evoker, for one refresh less.

Actually the Channeler is as good as the Evoker, if that Evoker takes specialization in that element, and the Evoker has 2 more elements to bring to the table.  Also the Evoker could use Refinements to expand his/her element repertoire and hit people all sorts of angles.

And you really only need one element. That's another problem with the spellcasting rules, and if you fix it then your houserule may be quite reasonable. But as it is, Channeling + Refinement blows Evocation out of the water.

I'm unsure about this.  I haven't gotten much play time with the system, so it may be that most people pretty much just focus on one element.  Still, it seems like a big advantage to have many different elements at your call.

Crafting is perhaps the only field in which a FP is viable at higher power levels. A Crafting specialist is arguably better off with Ritual instead of Thaumaturgy.* So by making Ritual stronger, you make this archetype (which is already quite powerful) much stronger.

Well if they are going to be a specialist, then why not take Ritual?  I'd think Thaumaturgy's great gift would be be access to all those other abilities, like wards and summoning and tracking.

In conclusion, I think that your houserule might not so much solve the problem as reverse it so that FPs are better than wizards.

PS: Do FPs in your game have to obey a specialization pyramid? And if so, how does it work?

*Very arguably, and of course Thaumaturgy looks better when you have a lot of Refresh to play with.

Actually I'm throwing out the pyramid for Evokers and Thaumaturgists too.  Why shouldn't one Evoker be ok with Water and Earth, but will kick your ass between your ears with Spirit magic?  It seems like a pretty arbitrary thing to do.  Maybe there was some issues discovered by Beta testers that necessitated it, but until I hear about them I'm chucking it.

[Sanctaphrax]

Personally, I consider the pyramid a necessary evil. It helps deal with the basic problem that one element can do everything. Especially if that element is spirit. Now, a GM can reward versatility through good game management. But in the absence of such circumstances, there won't be many situations where you say: "Man! I really wish I could use water evocations right now!"

Also, I'm not sure that I understand your houserule. I thought that I did, but you've thrown me into doubt with your first comment. So, is the following true?: Channeling and Ritual come with two free specializations where Evocation and Thaumaturgy provide only one. If so, then I don't see how the Evoker can equal the Channeler (given the assumption that extra elements aren't very useful).

Your point about specialization is valid, although I hate to see anything that makes the crafter archetype more powerful.

By the way, thanks for being willing to discuss this so reasonably. It's nice to see that internet arguments don't have to involve flaming.

[Quazar]

Oh that's right I did say that Ritual and Channeling get two.  I'd changed my mind but never posted the revision.  I thought, a specialization and 3 elements is surely better than 2 specializations and 1 element.  But then I decided it wasn't a big enough difference to justify a loss of refresh.  So I just give Ritual and Channeling one specialization, instead of the none like it says in the book.  And the ability to take Refinements in your power.

I'm unsure what to do about the elements problem.  I've been considering putting certain restrictions on certain elements.  For example, the Earth equivalent of Forzare/Fuego would require at least another level of control to pull off, compared to Fire/Spirit.

Do Crafters really kick everyone else around?

[MijRai]

They can, quite easily if you let them. +5 Lore, 2 foci. That means they could have a +5 effect with 3 uses for a single enchanted item slot. And after that, they get to spend mental stress to keep using it. Now, throw in some more foci, some specialization, and more slots. It gets quite unfair, in my opinion.

[Drashna]

Dedicated crafters can make powerful items, but they don't get that control bonus to discipline rolls, so it can be much harder to hit anything. Nor from focus items. Their staying power is awesome, though. with 9 refresh, you could make 9 shift effect items. That's 5 armor!

The problem is +4 discipline vs +9.

[Sanctaphrax]

I wouldn't call crafters unfair, but they're definitely very powerful and very easy to make. Making them stronger probably isn't a good idea.

If I were to rebalance the elements I would probably ditch the fire, water, earth, air, spirit combo and come up with something else. Something with elements that can't be so easily rationalized into doing everything. I would want one element for physical attacks and offensive maneuvers, one for physical defences and defensive maneuvers, one for veils and other mental stuff, and one for movement and controlling the landscape. I'd like to add a fifth element, but I can't think of a good domain for it.

This would naturally make wizards a bit weaker and focused practitioners a lot weaker, but it would solve the problem of elemental interchangability. And it would let us dispose of that bloody offensive/defensive evocation focus rule.

What do you guys think?

[devonapple]

I prefer maintaining the current flexibility of elements.

[sinker]

Seems to me that under the current system there are still weaknesses in every element. For example it's going to be hard to justify doing much with fire other than burn things. However more than that I actually like the way that the current system rewards a creative player.

[Sanctaphrax]

Can you think of a weakness for spirit? Because I can't.

[MyNinjaH8sU]

You can't set something on fire with it.

[devonapple]

You can't set something on fire with it.

What about a Soulfire spirit attack evocation which ignites the life force in a target, setting it ablaze? Wouldn't burn a rock, but people and plants might work.

[MyNinjaH8sU]

So you've added another -4 worth of refresh to make spirit able to burn some things but not all? Seems fair to me. 

[devonapple]

My mistake - I meant Soulfire as a descriptor and not the full power.

[MyNinjaH8sU]

My mistake - I meant Soulfire as a descriptor and not the full power.

Hmm, I see what you mean, but I'm not sure I'd allow this without some sort of further justification. Spirit is pretty well defined in YS as the go-to for veils, force, and mind magic. I have trouble seeing it used this way.

Note, I'm not trying to be asinine about this, I just think that there are some limits that are pretty well defined, and this seems like one of them. It's always strange to me that a lot of people (not saying you are one of them) seem to interpret any element as doing anything. You can't drown someone in earth, can't burn them with water, can't make a solid wall out of fire, etc., etc.

[Sanctaphrax]

I'm sorry, that was an imprecise question. I meant, "can you think of a situation that requires an evoker to use an element other than spirit and isn't horribly contrived? Because I can't."

Fluff-wise, the elements are quite different. It's the crunch that concerns me.