Supplemental/No Stress casting idea

[ARedthorn]

Side-question from another thread... Thinking about my delayed spells also gave me the idea of allowing spells as supplemental w/ the worst possible discipline check assumed, so if they can pull it off at a -4, they can do it as a supplemental. (This still gives the main action a -1, and are still limited to a single supplemental action). SF:

(click to show/hide)

On the supporting side of this, it would explain Ivy's dual-casting in rule-terms

This of course led me to the possibility of allowing a spell to be cast at no stress cost for -4 power.
Probably not both, of course, that'd be double-dipping, since once you're at -4 to one or the other, being -4 to both isn't really any worse.

Do either sound reasonable, and if so, do both?

[UmbraLux]

Do either sound reasonable, and if so, do both?

Not really.  Declarations and maneuvers would quickly negate the -4 and give unlimited casting. 

[ARedthorn]

I don't necessarily see that, at my player's power levels... they'd never be able to place more than one aspect on themselves in a supplemental (-4 to their control would pop them down to +3 or +4 in their best element, barely enough to cover the standard DC)... immediately tapping that for their primary action would grant them +2 shifts to a spell that's already at -1 (from using a supplemental in the same round), for a total +1.

At the cost of not being able to do anything else (like move a zone or juggle), and at the cost of an extra stress (from using 2 spells, so filling 2 boxes).

For an extra stress, they could've gone more direct and gotten a *drumroll* +1 shift by overcharging 1 past their power, and still only be using up a single box instead of 2. Not very profitable when used that way.



Meanwhile, if they used their primary action to set up the maneuvers, they'd be at -1 to do it, and would be able to maneuver themselves 2 single-round aspects. Tagging those on the supplemental would cancel out the -4 penalty... and now they're paying double the stress to break even.



You'd need 10 control and 6 power before you could start to see a gain (cause you can pull 2 aspects at -4 penalty as supplemental), tag both on the main roll to gain +3 (+4 from the tags, -1 from the supplemental). 3 extra shifts is a lot, but you are pinning yourself down by spending your supplemental action, and you are gaining double the stress boxes.
Plus, 10 total control with 6 power already puts you in a solidly strong league. If you're willing to tire yourself out that quickly... I'm not sure I'd stop you... especially considering the same mage, taking advantage of the same rule, could get off a rote attack or defense as supplemental instead, and still probably get better bang for their buck.

It'd really start to get broken with 13 control and 9 power, but at that point... who are we kidding?

As an addendum to my first post- this isn't necessarily something I'd want on the table as a house rule- more likely a 1-refresh ability. I haven't really thought it through much... but it intrigues me, and fills a gap in the books, so I think I'm instinctively like it. I'm happy to be talked out of it with a good example how it can go wrong.

EDIT: Unless, of course, you were referring to the no-stress casting or combo-platter, UmbraLux... in which case, yeah- I see your point, and am taking that off the table. I'm more intrigued by the supplemental casting.

[Tsunami]

SF:

(click to show/hide)

On the supporting side of this, it would explain Ivy's dual-casting in rule-terms

(click to show/hide)

Ivy's casting can simply be judged as a broad spectrum Block against attacks. All this multi casting is then description.
Also, There is really no need to explain Ivy, a plot device level character, in rule-terms  

Concerning the general idea of supplemental spells.

Casters are hugely powerful when you get to higher power-levels. Making them even more so is, i'm sorry to have to say that, downright insane.
Meanwhile, you said that it does not change much when you use your idea at lower power-levels... so why use it at all ? Lower levels are mostly unaffected, and higher levels are fubared... not much gain imho.

[EdgeOfDreams]

I'm away from my books right now, but I believe there is a rule that supplemental actions should never accomplish more than 1 shift worth of effect.  Based on that, I *might* be persuaded to allow a player to summon up 1 shift of power and cast as if they'd rolled a total of 1 on their discipline check to control it as a supplemental action.  On the one hand, I'd be wary of abuse. On the other, it probably wouldn't be very powerful at that level.

[UmbraLux]

I don't necessarily see that, at my player's power levels... they'd never be able to place more than one aspect on themselves in a supplemental (-4 to their control would pop them down to +3 or +4 in their best element, barely enough to cover the standard DC)... immediately tapping that for their primary action would grant them +2 shifts to a spell that's already at -1 (from using a supplemental in the same round), for a total +1.

...snip...

EDIT: Unless, of course, you were referring to the no-stress casting or combo-platter, UmbraLux... in which case, yeah- I see your point, and am taking that off the table. I'm more intrigued by the supplemental casting.

I was talking about the lack of stress with regards to endless casting and both when saying it's trivially easy to accomplish.

It's not about power levels, it's about the rules.  On one round I can declare I'm entering a Zen Mind, on the next I declare Aiming at his Head, and cast the spell tagging both declarations.  The -4 is compensated for every other exchange and I still have a normal action on the other exchanges.  As Tsunami said, casters are powerful enough.

Either of those options would make them far too powerful. 

[braincraft]

I think that if you absolutely had to implement multi-casting in some way, the fairest and least game-breaking way to do it is to allow you to split shifts of effect (and control) between spells, after rolling using the worst rating for either spell.

i.e.: You want to cast a shield with Spirit (power +1, control +2 with Spirit) and throw a fireball using Fire, duh (power +3, control +2 with Fire). Your worst rating is +1 power, +2 control, so you start with that. Your Conviction and Discipline are both Fantastic (which is why you're even contemplating this), and you have a free tag of a scene aspect that you assessed earlier (Confluence of Ley Lines), as well as 4 FP in your pocket. You want a Block of at least Fantastic, since there's a lot of spells being flung around, and you want a weapon 4 attack over a zone. That's 12 shifts of effect, 5 over your effective Conviction; since you have an extra consequence, you decide to just take the difference as backlash and deal with the headache. You also need to get 12 shifts on your Discipline roll; you use your free tag, get a +0 on your roll, and spend a FP invoking your high concept to make it.

The end result is that you take 5 mental stress and have to take a mild consequence to stay in the fight (though you could have burned FP to buy that down), and you get to have a shield and an attack at about half the strength you could have gotten if you'd just cast a single spell. I don't think that's particularly more kerborken than a 12-shift fireball, or a 12-shift shield. It also makes really powerful wizards even more scary, since with focus items Senior Council members are probably throwing 16 shifts at a time on a bad roll.