When I started with the Evocation rewrite, I also wanted to give Thaumaturgy a go, but I couldn't for the life of me figure out how. The things that were bothering me with Evocation are similar to the things that I don't like in Thaumaturgy.The numbers get way too high for me to feel comfortable, and the process of casting the spell itself just feels disconnected from the rest of the game. I couldn't put my finger on it before, but then I found the Google+ posts of
Robert Hanz. It was especially
this post that caught my attention. I thought that might work to clean up Thaumaturgy.
So what do I want to do? First, I want to make Thaumaturgy a conflict. Always. It might be a short conflict every now and then, but it will be a conflict nontheless. But you can't have a conflict without at least one opposing character. So lets go fractal on this thing and make the spell itself the opposing character. If you take out the spell, you have successfully cast it, if you as the caster are taken out, you go into fallout land. You could concede at any point, so you cast the spell, but less powerful or a bit different than you planned to.
The bare minimum I see for a spell character is a high concept (basically a description of the spell like "regular old tracking spell" or "ritual of doom" or something along those lines), a trouble aspect (Magic isn't always the best way to do things, even if it is sometimes the only way, so there might be inherent limitations or flaws in the spell itself) and some skills. I would go with complexity, power as skills for now, but maybe it could become more. I think I'd like an endurance sort of skill as well, that determines the length of the spells stress track. Right now, I don't have an idea for a good name though, so I'll just call it endurance for now. Or just lump it into complexity or power?
Complexity would be the spells defense skill. The Wizard will attack it with his Lore skill.
Power would be the spells attack skill. The more power it requires, the more it will take out of the wizard and at some point he might get taken out because it was too much for him to handle. The Wizard would defend against this with conviction. The spell might even get a weapon rating.
"Endurance" determines the length of the stress track and bonus consequences.
The thing what is left to consider are the
duration of one exchange in this thaumaturgy conflict and the number of consequences the spell can take before it is taken out. Mostly, I think this has to be a group consensus. I would probably, as a default, start with 1 minute and go up from there. If you relate that to complexity, you could just say that a complexity of 1 equals 1 minute, and go up the table (Y315) according to the complexity. A spell with a complexity of 5 would then have exchanges that are an hour long. Since a complexity of 5 is almost the top of the scale in this new set of rules, I think it is ok like this.
Consequences should probably be based on how important the spell is. Kind of like mooks, unnamed npcs, named npcs and the likes.
So that would be the basic makeup of a spell: High concept and skills. But what about different circumstances? Easy: stunts and powers.
So you got a bundle of hair from the bad guy and want to use them in a tracking spell, but he is behind a ward now? Give the spell a toughness power, depending on the strength of the ward. The spell is extra hard to cast or requires a boatload of money? Make it a stunt for its attack or defend skill. Or any countermeasures the target might have can factor in as stunts and powers on the side of the spell.
So for example, it could look something like this:
High concept: basic tracking spell
Trouble: as the crow flies
Magical stress track: OOO
Skills:+2 Complexity
+1 Endurance, Power
Even the OW Harry can tackle this spell in a matter of minutes. The conflict would be set up, and Harry's goal would be stated (for example "find the location of the bad guy"). The spell is what is standing between him and this goal. If the spell was to overpower Harry, he could concede and say that he was only able to pinpoint the location within a block or so and now has a splitting headache.
This will, I imagine, make thaumaturgy a bit more interesting, add a little drama. It removes the "i win" effect, that a ritual without time constraints can feel like. It removes the passive casting without rolls and replaces it with active peril for the wizard. It basically turns thaumaturgy into a tool that allows you to start a conflict, and a conflict is where the action is. A conflict really tells the story of the spell.
Now I'm not sure yet how to actually handle a revamped thaumaturgy power. 3 refresh for a power that basically just lets you initiate conflicts feels kind of pricey. I also have no idea yet what to do with focus items, specializations and the likes. Regardless, If you have worked through this wall of text, I would appreciate your thoughts for the moment.
