Using Multiple Enchanted Items At Once

[Mr. Death]

So what's the limit on using enchanted items at once? Mostly, I'm thinking of things like, in the books, Harry firing off several (or all) of the charges on his power rings at once. He's explicitly doing it to get more bang out at once, and it definitely has that effect, but how would you model it in game? Could you let someone use extra charges of an enchanted item to enhance the Weapon effect?

How do you keep this from getting ridiculous (the book describes Harry's original ring as a Weapon:4 effect, and later books have him with as many as 12 charges on it--just multiplying it would be flat out broken), while keeping it worthwhile (Harry keeps doing it, and it's shown to have a tangible benefit)?

[ways and means]

The best solution is to have 1 use simply add 1 power, so if you use 5 +5 blasting rings you get a single +10 effect instead of 25 shifts of effect over 5 turns.

[wyvern]

I'd probably just say you're confusing narrative with game mechanics - something that's trivially easy to do with this system.

So, the narrative is that he's got 12 of these things, and discharges them singly or in groups as needed.

The mechanic is that he's got one enchanted item, which initially functioned at weapon: 4, and eventually got upgraded to 5 or 6 - with either lore or increased slots.  Multiple uses?  Well, he can pay mental stress for that.

[Mr. Death]

Well, Your Story has Harry and Billy describing it as adding uses with more slots, not adding power and paying for extra uses with stress.

I kind of like ways and means' suggestion. Having some kind of diminishing returns like that would keep people from making three or four enchanted items, then letting loose with all of them to throw a 20+shift attack at someone.

[wyvern]

Indeed it does.  One of many places where YS did something... differently than I would have.  Still, the overall effect is much the same - get a few extra uses from slots, pay stress when you're using it in a less stressful scene (where you don't expect to need your full evocation potential), increase power with lore...

[Mr. Death]

Actually, now that I think of it, you might be on to something. In the books, he says right out that he's got 12 uses--assuming he kept it around that power, to have 12 uses of one item, he'd have to put 12 enchanted item slots into it, give or take--which is three full Refinements, and Harry has probably never had that much available refresh to blow on one item. Given that I don't think we've seen him use just one charge since then, it probably is some combination of more uses and higher power.

That the narrative is that he has 12 uses of lower powered spell effects, but he and the GM agreed that he'd use several at a time to make the mechanical effect an item with, say, three uses but at Weapon:5 or 6 instead.

...Though that still leaves the issue of how to adjudicate it on the occasions where he's throwing all the uses into it.

[wyvern]

Spend a fate point to boost the attack, balanced by a (assuming the GM agrees) self-compel that that item is unavailable for the rest of the adventure?

[Orladdin]

Easily settled: each of these occasions are the first time Harry has used the rings in the book, right?  The GM probably just lets him re-stat the item while keeping the same power level because it's thematically appropriate.

Jim:  Hey, can I restat Harry's rings here to represent him using them all at once?  They've got 6 item slots allocated for them, and I'd been planning to use them as three strength 4 blasts, but this makes more sense.  It will expend them all for the rest of the session.  Is that ok?
Jim's GM:  Sure.  Seems appropriate in this case.  You should probably roll for a declaration, though.  If you can get a Good Lore, we can say you manage it.

[Sanctaphrax]

I don't think that we should make rules for using multiple uses at once. There are a few reasons, but the main one is that most enchanted items don't actually have uses in-story.

Look at Harry's duster. It's an enchanted item. Would it make sense for him to use all of its uses at once for extra benefits?

Also, you can get extra uses with mental stress, which introduces some oddness into your idea.

And it's probably not a good idea to let crafters into the nova shtick that evokers have.

PS: 1 slot = 2 uses.

[Mr. Death]

Well, yeah, it wouldn't make sense for a lot of items, but in the books, at least, the rings are explicitly noted as having several charges (or, put another way, he's got a dozen small items that all do the same thing, once), and he uses several at once to distinct effect.

I guess in most games, it'd be more likely to have a case of using two distinct items at once (like, say, going guns-akimbo with prepared wands). As a note, it's not really my idea; as I said before, I'm just trying to figure out how something from the books would be modeled in-game.

I totally agree that it wouldn't be a good idea to let it get out of hand--if there's any way it would be implemented, it certainly wouldn't be strictly additive.

And d'oh, yeah, screwed up the math on that one.

[Sanctaphrax]

I'm just trying to figure out how something from the books would be modeled in-game.

Rarely a profitable enterprise, in my opinion. The books are books, and the rules are not intended to model them.

I mean, you can use Aspects and stuff to cover anything and everything with enough work. But I don't think it's a very valuable use of time.

[Mr. Death]

Perhaps, but there's always the potential that a player is going to want to do something similar to what's depicted in the books, so it helps to have some basis for my answer beforehand. Always better to be prepared than to be caught flat-footed.

That, and I enjoy it as a mental exercise.

[UmbraLux]

I'd suggest the rules are already there...just make a declaration.  "I'm using two charges!"  Tag it for your +2 and mark two off.  Using more than two should probably remain dependent on how the GM / table likes to use / stack declarations and aspects.

[computerking]

Perhaps, but there's always the potential that a player is going to want to do something similar to what's depicted in the books, so it helps to have some basis for my answer beforehand. Always better to be prepared than to be caught flat-footed.

That, and I enjoy it as a mental exercise.

Have I been playing the game/reading the rules too much? My first thought was, "Player Declaration places fragile Aspect Caught Flat-Footed on GM. Tags for +2 to his Deceit Roll to get extra damage for his character."

[InFerrumVeritas]

I like the idea of simply using declarations to model this, then compelling those aspects if the player tries to use the item again.