I've been messing with this a bit, based on some of the comments in this thread. I was thinking about an idea and was wondering what people thought (basically I'm trying to keep the power of evocation more in line with other powers and with my own expectations based on the novels and setting, while also trying to keep or make Discipline and Conviction roughly equally useful).
Evocation House Rule Idea: You cannot increase Power above your Conviction (plus any specializations, focus items, etc.) with stress.
You may choose any power up to or equal to your modified Conviction and you suffer a single Mental stress, whatever the Power is. The only way to cast a spell with Power higher than your modified Conviction is with Mental consequences or Sponsored Magic debt. Consequences increase the Power up to their rating (e.g. a Minor consequence gives +2 Power while an Extreme mental consequences gives +8 Power). I haven't really thought through how Sponsored magic would work exactly, but it makes sense to me that it should thematically and mechanically.
There are a couple repercussions of this that I can think of that I'll discuss below. Please point out anything that I'm missing or overlooking or miscalculating.
Mental Stress: Since every spell causes a single stress no matter what its Power, Mental stress is simply a counter ("pouring extra power in" is represented by consequences, not stress). So at Conviction 1-2 you can cast three evocation spells without consequences, while with 3+ Conviction you can cast four evocation spells without consequences. Really, this isn't all that different and actually lessens some of the calculations ("well, I've already filled stress boxes 1 & 3 so I might as well go for a stress 2 or 4 Power, since a 1 or 3 are going to roll up anyway..."). It's a pretty minor thing either way, but unless I'm overlooking something I think that 1 stress per spell will work fine in practice without substantially how Mental stress limits evocation.
Evocation Attacks: Discipline is still slightly better than Conviction for attacks, which I'm okay with. An extra point in Conviction or an extra point in Discipline both give +1 damage, while Discipline has an edge because it's more likely to hit targets with good defense skills and/or armor and because you're less likely to suffer Backlash or Fallout. Conviction isn't completely irrelevant: Attacking multiple opponents or hitting a whole zone both require a minimum Power and can't be done unless your modified Conviction is high enough, whatever you Discipline is. Plus, there are other benefits to Conviction (see below). But all in all, a balance is ideal, but higher Discipline is better than higher Conviction for evocation attacks. And I'm okay with that.
But apart from the balance or Discipline and Conviction, how does it affect damage and the power of evocation? In practice, it's costly to get a Weapon rating higher than your modified Conviction. But for most wizards, that still means Weapon ratings of 3 or more (7 or higher isn't that hard to get at character creation). When you add in that they
can get significantly more powerful attacks with consequences or sponsored magic, I don't feel like they're too weak.
On a personal note, it also resolves something that's always bothered me, which is that the difference between a wizard with Conviction 3 and Conviction 5 isn't all that big in practice in the RAW. In the books Dresden is described as being very innately powerful, but I don't think the RAW captures that well compared to other wizard builds.
Other uses of Evocation: Modified Conviction is more important than Discipline in every other use of evocation except attacks.
- Most effects have a minimum Power (e.g., Maneuvers are 3 or the target's affected skill)
- The strength of blocks and armor is based on Power, not the control roll
- All modifiers (duration, area of effect, etc.) increase the required Power
- More powerful spells are harder to counterspell (a masterful but weak warden with Conviction 1 and Discipline 7 would be a lot easier to counterspell than they would be to dodge)
- The more Power you have, the easier it is to counterspell other people's spells
- Conviction also determines how many spells you can cast
So overall I'm pretty happy with the balance of Discipline and Conviction with this house rule. I also think it stacks better in comparison to other "combat" powers of similar cost (e.g. Supernatural Strength if you consider the drawbacks of Evocation to effectively be a "price discount")
Thaumaturgy: As far as I can see, Thaumaturgy isn't much changed. It will never cause mental stress unless I tweaked the house rule (like saying that you can do up to 2 below your Conviction for no stress, while 1 below or equal to your Conviction causes 1 stress). Also, since the only way to get more Power is consequences (Thaumaturgy doesn't allow Conviction to be modified by specializations or focus items), Conviction becomes a pretty hard cap on the fastest you can possibly cast a spell. Control (Discipline) is still more important because you don't want to have the spell blow up.
It seems to me like the balance of stats is similar to RAW thaumaturgy, with Conviction getting a small boost in that it's a more fixed cap on casting speed than it used to be.
Again, I might be missing something.
Anyway, I'm not set on the above house rule by any means. But I was thinking about ways to prevent the insanely powerful attacks that I talked about in the original post (where each fate point effectively gives +4 damage) that are easier than my original house rule yet don't make Discipline significantly better than Conviction, like the second idea above of saying that only successes above the higher of Power or attack roll add to damage.
So, thoughts? Comments? (Note: Pointing out any big flaws and ripping it apart won't hurt my feelings--I'd be grateful.)
-John B.