ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: Gatts on January 21, 2012, 02:14:34 PM
-
I did a search, but nothing came up so I'm sorry if this has already been answered.
How much refresh would you price Thaumaturgy with the speed and methods of Evocation by itself, with none of the other trappings? Would it be balanced at all?
-
At least four refresh or three if ritual instead of full thaumaturgy. Might go as high as five and four respectively since it also seems to avoid a sponsor's agenda.
-
At least four refresh or three if ritual instead of full thaumaturgy. Might go as high as five and four respectively since it also seems to avoid a sponsor's agenda.
Thanks, yeah it would avoid a Sponsor's Agenda. Is 'Evothaum' really half of Sponsored Magic though?
-
Sponsored Magic is normally 4 Refresh. You get one off for Evo or Thaum. Now, you wouldn't have the ability to accrue debt to boost powers or new elemental focus option (like Summer or Winter), but you also wouldn't have the sponsor's agenda to deal with. So, if you've got Thaum and Evo, I'd say two refresh for a single type (like transformation magic). If you only have Thaum, I'd price it at 3. If you only have Evo, I don't think it'd be possible.
-
Thanks, yeah it would avoid a Sponsor's Agenda. Is 'Evothaum' really half of Sponsored Magic though?
There's a difference between "EvoThaum" and "EvoRitual". Hmm, not sure the shorthand makes sense. Point is, the thaumaturgy at evocation's speed etc given by a sponsor is limited to a theme, it's not all of thaumaturgy.
Don't remember for sure whether or not Kemmlerians get thaumaturgy at evocation's speed but, assuming they do, they'll only be able to create fast rituals for necromancy and related spells. They'll have to used normal thaumaturgy if they want to transform something.
So my pricing above was based on Thaumaturgy and Ritual...adding at least one refresh to either for the ability to cast faster. And it may be worth two since you're not limited by debt or an external agenda.
-
It's...early? And I'm tired, so forgive me if my post seems a mite disjointed.
The ability to accrue sponsor debt is by no means a limitation.
All of Thaumaturgy at evocation's speed and methods is worth at least 3 points, if not upwards of 5 or so, in its own right.
(assuming either that you can use Thaumaturgy normally in addition to the altered version or that you're only paying for the altered version)
Kemmlerian Necromancy grants both necromantic and psychomantic thaumaturgical rituals with the speed and methods of evocation.
-
The ability to accrue sponsor debt is by no means a limitation.
That depends on how different your sponsor's agenda is from yours... ;)
All of Thaumaturgy at evocation's speed and methods is worth at least 3 points, if not upwards of 5 or so, in its own right.
(assuming either that you can use Thaumaturgy normally in addition to the altered version or that you're only paying for the altered version)
I was leaning more towards two plus thaumaturgy's cost, but I can see arguments for more. It's certainly a powerful ability.
Kemmlerian Necromancy grants both necromantic and psychomantic thaumaturgical rituals with the speed and methods of evocation.
Thanks. Couldn't remember and didn't have the book handy.
-
You want ALL OF THAUMATURGY with evocation's methods and speed? Um, I'd price that at Thaumaturgy+2 for the first type you want (let's say Summoning) and then an additional +1 for an additional type, limited to a maximum number of types by your Lore bonus. In universe, you'd be looking at Archive level understanding of magic.
-
That depends on how different your sponsor's agenda is from yours... ;)
The only way sponsor debt can negatively impact a character is by way of the effect of compels. Compels for which the player has already been 'payed'.
Sponsor debt being nothing more than pre-paid compels, it can, in fact, impact a character in no other way than by compels.
All compels are, ostensibly, equal, regardless of source.
-
@thread: I'd say 4-5 refresh.
@InFerrumVeritas: How impressive it is in-universe does not have to correspond to how much it costs. How impressive it is in-game does. Being an omnipotent god could be an aspect, and therefore free, without balance problems.
@Tedronai: I agree completely. Other interpretations lead to people "gaming" their aspects, which is very bad. You should not be penalized for taking a "bad" aspect, and the same principle applies to sponsors.
-
The only way sponsor debt can negatively impact a character is by way of the effect of compels. Compels for which the player has already been 'payed'.
Sponsor debt being nothing more than pre-paid compels, it can, in fact, impact a character in no other way than by compels.
All compels are, ostensibly, equal, regardless of source.
True but, because you're already been paid, it's much harder to say "No" than to a standard compel. (Unless you don't have fate points when being compelled.) But you're correct in the agenda being more limiting than debt.
-
Debt is limiting.
The ability to accrue debt is quite the opposite.
As to 'saying NO', when being compelled via sponsor debt, you simply can't.
Unless your GM is ignoring the rules and/or simply being a jerk, though, you shouldn't have to. The compel is still a negotiation, and still only restricts/complicates choices rather than mandating them.
-
I realise in hindsight how powerful the entirety of Thaumaturgy at the speed of evocation is, and yeah more or less doubling the price seems justified. But how about something like Ritual? That's usually more or less as limited as Sponsored Magic to begin with.
(And thanks for all the replies guys!)
-
I would think either way its going to be treated like an extraordinarily powerful sponsored magic, but basically you use it as if you were your own patron, so you can't accrue debt.
So that would be 4 points on top of Thaumaturgy for a total of 7 points, with the normal discount for also taking Evocation to drop its cost by 1 to a total of 10. However I also wouldn't mind a slightly cheaper version that only applies to one type of thaumaturgical magic, such as Summoning, or Divination.
-
As to 'saying NO', when being compelled via sponsor debt, you simply can't.
False. It's quite clear that you can - at the cost of a fate point. There's even a sidebar where it discusses what happens to the point of debt when you do this - and the answer is, the debt's still there, but the sponsor can't try to compel that particular issue again.
As for the thread topic - I'd cost it in the following way: musts: You must have full evocation & thaumaturgy before you can even consider taking this power. One refresh per evocation element (or similarly limited theme). So the total cost would be: 3 (thaumaturgy) + 3 (evocation) + 2 (refinement to get access to the other two evocation elements + 5 (one refresh per element's worth of evothaum) = 13 refresh spent to be able to pretend you're a mini-archive. (For replicating the actual archive, consider another 10 refresh in refinement, plus lore & discipline skills at 8 or higher.)
-
I really think that people are overvaluing this. I'd say that Ritual-as-Evocation is worth 1 Refresh for someone who already has Ritual. Canonical Sponsored Magic backs me up on this. And since Thaumaturgy is 1 refresh more expensive than Ritual, it stands to reason that Thaumaturgy-as-Evocation is worth 2 refresh if you already have Thaumaturgy.
So it's probably worth 5 refresh if you don't have Thaumaturgy.
I simply cannot understand why anyone would think that 7 or 10 Refresh would be reasonable.
(Also, 2 Evocation elements should only cost 1 refresh since you aren't getting free specializations along with your elements here.)
PS: I think that refusing a debt compel with a FP voids that point of debt. YS 288 is where I got that idea from.
-
I really think that people are overvaluing this. I'd say that Ritual-as-Evocation is worth 1 Refresh for someone who already has Ritual. Canonical Sponsored Magic backs me up on this. And since Thaumaturgy is 1 refresh more expensive than Ritual, it stands to reason that Thaumaturgy-as-Evocation is worth 2 refresh if you already have Thaumaturgy.
So it's probably worth 5 refresh if you don't have Thaumaturgy.
I simply cannot understand why anyone would think that 7 or 10 Refresh would be reasonable.
(Also, 2 Evocation elements should only cost 1 refresh since you aren't getting free specializations along with your elements here.)
PS: I think that refusing a debt compel with a FP voids that point of debt. YS 288 is where I got that idea from.
Thanks very much, and thanks to everyone else for all their help. I'll run it by my GM and see how it goes.
-
Wyvern is correct, you can say no to a debt compel.
PS: I think that refusing a debt compel with a FP voids that point of debt. YS 288 is where I got that idea from.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you mean by "void" but refusing a compel costs you a fate point and does not reduce your debt. However, you can't be compelled for the same thing after refusing it.
I read it as being able to draw a line in the sand saying "I'm not going to commit <that act> for my sponsor." It goes along with some of the later advice to Harry on dealing with Mab. The sponsor may make certain things attractive and easy, but you aren't a slave.
---
@Gatts - The ability to use Ritual at evocation's speed, etc is essentially taking Channeling for the Ritual's theme...but better. So I'd start with the cost of Channeling as my minimum unless you already have Channeling for the appropriate theme. If you have it, I'd probably just charge one refresh.
-
Sorry to resurrect the thread, but it appears that things are rather more complex than I first thought. While we're playing in the Dresden Files system, the setting we're using is Mage: The Awakening, which has resulted in a couple of changes.
- A) The elements for Evocation are now the Mage Arcana: Time, Space, Fate, Mind, Death, Matter, Forces, Spirit, Life, Prime
- B) Thaumaturgy is now restricted to three Arcana, in the same manner as Evocation. These work a little like thematic Thaumaturgy, with the same list as above.
With this in mind, it seems like taking Thaumaturgy at 5 refresh is better in every respect than taking Evocation AND Thaumaturgy, and that would still be the case if it were priced at 6 refresh. I'm hoping someone will come in and correct me on this, but I'm not getting my hopes up. So thanks in advance for any help.
@Gatts - The ability to use Ritual at evocation's speed, etc is essentially taking Channeling for the Ritual's theme...but better. So I'd start with the cost of Channeling as my minimum unless you already have Channeling for the appropriate theme. If you have it, I'd probably just charge one refresh.
It looks like you're right, and 5 refresh for Ritual atthespeedofevocation is the minimum.
-
Yes, even without that in mind, Thaumaturgy at 5 refresh with evocation's methods and speed would be better than taking evocation and thaumaturgy. Thaumaturgy can replicate basically everything evocation does.
At the very least, it should be priced at 6 refresh. I'd wouldn't allow it for less than 8. I'd give a rebate of 3 if you already had Evocation.
-
Sorry to resurrect the thread, but it appears that things are rather more complex than I first thought. While we're playing in the Dresden Files system, the setting we're using is Mage: The Awakening, which has resulted in a couple of changes.
Given that, I'd suggest talking to your GM - that's a sufficiently fundamental shift in setting & game mechanics that this sort of question should really be decided by your group, as a deliberate choice in the context of the game world. For such a setting, I'd probably default to either: allowing evothaum as just a normal part of evocation (if you also have thaumaturgy for the relevant sphere), or allowing evothaum for your evocation rotes (only, & subject to the same limitation of needing actual thaumaturgy as well), depending on which version of Mage rules you're starting with.
-
Evothaum is not strictly better than evocation. Evocations, unlike rituals, have weapon ratings.
Though on further thought, I'm starting to think that it might be a good idea to require some level of both evocation and thaumaturgy for this. I stand by the 2 Refresh cost, but I think I might want to expand the prerequisites.
My reading of sponsor debt is that if you spend the FP to resist a debt compel the point of debt that fuelled that compel is still spent. After all, you spent the FP you "borrowed".
Is there some evidence to the contrary somewhere that I missed?
-
Evothaum is not strictly better than evocation. Evocations, unlike rituals, have weapon ratings.
Well...you have a good point but you need to balance it against no mental stress and not being subject to evocation's limitations.
I do think requiring both before extending thaumaturgy is a good approach. Or charge more and give discounts as Sponsored Magic does...which is close to the same thing.
-
I'm of the opinion that characters probably shouldn't have evothaum, except within the mixed blessing framework of sponsored magic. But for those who do, consider:
1) Custom power creation uses the same baseline guidelines as stunts, but are allowed a bit more punch.
2) Options for stunts include:
Reduce the amount of time necessary to complete a particular task by two steps.
3) Thaumaturgy cast as Evocation would have the same effective limits on complexity as Evocations do on power, so it's unlikely to see spells that would normally be hours-long rituals be cast this way. For the most part, this capability would cover spells that might otherwise take, say, minutes. Maybe 15 minutes or so at most?
4) Going from "15 minutes" down to "a few moments" (ie, a combat exchange) on the time chart (YS315) is four shifts.
Given the above, it seems to me that the price point for a Power that causes Thaumaturgy to be cast at Evocation's speed is on the order of -2 Refresh (which buys a four shift reduction on the time chart when performing Thaumaturgy, and would be on top of the cost for Thaumaturgy itself). Maybe less (-1 might be too little, though), considering that Thaum at Evo speed doesn't effect much more complex Thaum cast not at Evo speed (ie, you can't cast a ritual that might normally take a week in a few hours). As I said, I wouldn't make such a power available; just going through the logic problem of how such a thing might be costed.
My reading of sponsor debt is that if you spend the FP to resist a debt compel the point of debt that fuelled that compel is still spent. After all, you spent the FP you "borrowed".
Is there some evidence to the contrary somewhere that I missed?
Here:
"When you spend a fate point to resist a sponsor’s debt compel, does your debt still go down?"
"No, it doesn’t. But the sponsor can’t force that same issue again, either. You get to refuse that specific compel. But another one — and granted, a different one — is headed your way later."
-
Well...you have a good point but you need to balance it against no mental stress and not being subject to evocation's limitations.
'Evocation's methods' include paying mental stress.
-
'Evocation's methods' include paying mental stress.
Can you provide a reference? Or is that an assumption? I don't see mental stress listed in the "With Evocation's Methods and Speed"...here's what it means: text on YS288.
-
It is an inference from:
"The spell is cast like evocation:
power first, control later, all done in
one exchange"
Paying mental stress is an integral part of how evocation summons power.
-
Hmm, that's a bigger leap than I'm willing to make. It is still thaumaturgy after all. Perhaps more to the point, the line you quote is discussing casting methods not costs.
To put it in perspective, if it does cost mental stress, how is it different from a stunt allowing use of Lore instead of Conviction for evocation power?
I'll have to reread thesection when I have time this evening.
-
Hmm, that's a bigger leap than I'm willing to make. It is still thaumaturgy after all. Perhaps more to the point, the line you quote is discussing casting methods not costs.
If it doesn't, then where is the power coming from? I agree, paying Mental Stress for Thaumaturgy is pretty dire, but I have been figuring the advantage is in scope of effect, and possibly duration. I'm open to having my mind changed.
-
Uh, the cost is part of the methods? And it's different from your proposed stunt in two ways: evothaum still bases its power off conviction, and evothaum can do things that evocation simply can't - like healing someone, or establishing a ward that lasts for a day, or other complex or long-lasting effects.
-
If it doesn't, then where is the power coming from? I agree, paying Mental Stress for Thaumaturgy is pretty dire, but I have been figuring the advantage is in scope of effect, and possibly duration. I'm open to having my mind changed.
It's still thaumaturgy, power sources are the same (Lore + aspects). The differences are - Line of sight only (as evocation)
- It's cast in one exchange with spell power declared first and then a control roll (as evocation)
I'm not seeing any other changes to thaumaturgy...everything else defaults back to thaumaturgy.
Uh, the cost is part of the methods? And it's different from your proposed stunt in two ways: evothaum still bases its power off conviction, and evothaum can do things that evocation simply can't - like healing someone, or establishing a ward that lasts for a day, or other complex or long-lasting effects.
So, in your interpretation, the only differences between "thaumaturgy with evocation's methods and speed" and evocation are duration and some minor scope changes?
You have to add a lot of changes to the text to get there. The only changes to thaumaturgy listed are LoS and "power first, control second, in one exchange".
I certainly haven't been able to find any mention of taking stress to cast a thaumaturgy spell at speed or switching out Lore for Conviction. The first I could see adding as a balance issue. I'm not sure why you'd want the second...it no longer seems like thaumaturgy to me.
-
A lot of what Sponsored Magic is supposed to reflect, in my view, is to model how certain folks in the setting (notably, powerful Sidhe, Kemmlerites, and users of Hellfire or Soulfire) can cast powerful magic with the greatest of ease, and EvoThaum is a key element of how that is modeled in the Dresden magical system. I'm inclined to vote against charging Mental stress for the ability, but only by a narrow margin. If EvoThaum gets the advantage of Thaumaturgical duration, the impact of charging Mental stress could be negligible in all but the most embroiled magical conflicts.
Do we have any "Actual Play" (official or semi-official) references featuring EvoThaum in action?
-
So, in your interpretation, the only differences between "thaumaturgy with evocation's methods and speed" and evocation are duration and some minor scope changes?
I wouldn't call that a "minor" scope change. The difference in what evocation can do (direct brute-force stuff only), vs what thaumaturgy can do, is huge. It's like saying that it's just a minor scope change to replace a flashlight with a laptop computer.
And the only changes for evothaum are "with evocation's methods and speed" i.e. you use it just like you would evocation - set a power, call up shifts based on conviction, etc. I really don't understand how you can interpret it as being just "thaumaturgy with no prep"; in my opinion, the text doesn't support that at all.
As for higher end entities being able to use powerful magic with ease: you may note that, for an example, anything at the Lady+ level is, in the books, simply not statted. For others, keep in mind the benefits of sponsor debt. Out of mental stress boxes? No problem; casting something at Conviction+1 would normally cost 2 stress, which you can soak with a point of sponsor debt. If you're totally beholden to your sponsor anyway - i.e. Sidhe, or just that bonkers for kemmlerites / hellfire - why not?
And for making that "powerful magic with ease", well, that's just a case of those NPCs having -10 worth of refinement, or conviction / discipline at +8, or the like.
-
Side Question: If I have a powerful Sidhe NPC, should I perhaps be giving them full Evocation and Thaumaturgy, in addition to Sponsored Magic, so that they can easily justify the use of Refinements?
-
I wouldn't call that a "minor" scope change. The difference in what evocation can do (direct brute-force stuff only), vs what thaumaturgy can do, is huge. It's like saying that it's just a minor scope change to replace a flashlight with a laptop computer.
In the context of the number of shifts of power you can control, it's not all that much. You're probably not going to make any permanent changes with fast thaumaturgy. It take 12 shifts just to make something last a mortal lifetime. That alone is pushing the limits of optimization. Particularly since your Discipline roll has to match the number of shifts, unlike evocation thaumaturgy does not add the roll to the power.
And the only changes for evothaum are "with evocation's methods and speed" i.e. you use it just like you would evocation - set a power, call up shifts based on conviction, etc. I really don't understand how you can interpret it as being just "thaumaturgy with no prep"; in my opinion, the text doesn't support that at all.
I don't read any extra into the text. It states "Line of Sight" and "power/control/one exchange" - it doesn't say it 'becomes evocation in every way except scope and duration'.
As for higher end entities being able to use powerful magic with ease: you may note that, for an example, anything at the Lady+ level is, in the books, simply not statted. For others, keep in mind the benefits of sponsor debt. Out of mental stress boxes? No problem; casting something at Conviction+1 would normally cost 2 stress, which you can soak with a point of sponsor debt. If you're totally beholden to your sponsor anyway - i.e. Sidhe, or just that bonkers for kemmlerites / hellfire - why not?
And for making that "powerful magic with ease", well, that's just a case of those NPCs having -10 worth of refinement, or conviction / discipline at +8, or the like.
It seems to me you're making another change (use sponsor debt in place of stress) to make up for your previous change. Why not just read it strictly to start with?
-
Side Question: If I have a powerful Sidhe NPC, should I perhaps be giving them full Evocation and Thaumaturgy, in addition to Sponsored Magic, so that they can easily justify the use of Refinements?
I tend to treat sponsored magic as one theme / element. So they'll want other themes / elements for any refinements needing to follow a pyramid scheme. This is my treatment of it though - I don't think it's mentioned in the text.
-
Side Question: If I have a powerful Sidhe NPC, should I perhaps be giving them full Evocation and Thaumaturgy, in addition to Sponsored Magic, so that they can easily justify the use of Refinements?
I'd actually expect most Sidhe to carry around clear and visible trappings of magic; iconic objects are a significant part of such legends. As such, you shouldn't really need to give them Evocation or Thaumaturgy just for Refinements, instead purchasing higher-powered Focus items. For those who have the appropriate scope, and not just power, to justify reaching beyond the aegis of the Sponsored Magic to full-on Evocation or Thaumaturgy, then it's certainly a possibility. Seelie and Unseelie magic treat Summer and Winter as a single evocation element, according to the text, so that's how I'd expect them to be treated for Refinements; for thaumaturgical specialties, each has more than one area of focus.
-
I agree with devonapple's opinion that Thaum-as-Evo costs mental strain. My reasoning is based largely on the following:
Thaumaturgy’s set of effects are broader-reaching, not constricted by the straight-line force principles of evocation. With the power source, you get access to the listed set of thaumaturgic effects (often a thematic grouping of some sort) as a viable effect of an evocation spell. So you might be able to throw together a small ward quickly, summon a minor creature extra-quick, or cast a curse of decay with the flick of a wrist. In these cases, use what would have been the complexity of the thaumaturgic effect as a guideline for the power of the evocation.
To me, this clarifies that what they intended was that Sponsored Magic was intended to be treated as a 'normal' Evocation spell, but with a wider set of effects. That is, that within the contect of the sponsored magic 'element', you are no longer limited to attack, block, maneuver, and counterspell, but can additionally do things that normally would require Thaumaturgy (eg, tracking spells, summoning, wards, etc) as though those options were cut-and-pasted into the Evocation rules, but replacing complexity with 'shifts of power'.
Note that this does put some practical limits on the sorts of Thaumaturgy that a given spellcaster is capable of casting at evocation speed. A complexity 26 Entropy Curse (Weapons Grade) (see YS296) is just a matter of time and preparation; assuming the caster has a control of 5, it is guaranteed to succeed in 26 control rolls. Summoning 26 shifts worth of power for an Evocation version of this is much more challenging (even at conviction 5 and a couple of power specializations, that's 20 mental stress -- and that's before managing to control the spell in a single roll!) On the other hand, casting a quick tracking spell would be fairly easy. (Note that both examples assume that the spells fit into the Sponsored Magic theme to begin with.)
-
I agree with devonapple's opinion that Thaum-as-Evo costs mental strain. My reasoning is based largely on the following:Thaumaturgy’s set of effects are broader-reaching, not constricted by the straight-line force principles of evocation. With the power source, you get access to the listed set of thaumaturgic effects (often a thematic grouping of some sort) as a viable effect of an evocation spell. So you might be able to throw together a small ward quickly, summon a minor creature extra-quick, or cast a curse of decay with the flick of a wrist. In these cases, use what would have been the complexity of the thaumaturgic effect as a guideline for the power of the evocation.
To me, this clarifies that what they intended was that Sponsored Magic was intended to be treated as a 'normal' Evocation spell, but with a wider set of effects. That is, that within the contect of the sponsored magic 'element', you are no longer limited to attack, block, maneuver, and counterspell, but can additionally do things that normally would require Thaumaturgy (eg, tracking spells, summoning, wards, etc) as though those options were cut-and-pasted into the Evocation rules, but replacing complexity with 'shifts of power'.
Note that this does put some practical limits on the sorts of Thaumaturgy that a given spellcaster is capable of casting at evocation speed. A complexity 26 Entropy Curse (Weapons Grade) (see YS296) is just a matter of time and preparation; assuming the caster has a control of 5, it is guaranteed to succeed in 26 control rolls. Summoning 26 shifts worth of power for an Evocation version of this is much more challenging (even at conviction 5 and a couple of power specializations, that's 20 mental stress -- and that's before managing to control the spell in a single roll!) On the other hand, casting a quick tracking spell would be fairly easy. (Note that both examples assume that the spells fit into the Sponsored Magic theme to begin with.)
Thanks, I understand where your interpretation stems from now. Are you adding control roll to power for the effective number of shifts? If not, it seems too weak to be useful. If you are, I'd call it "evocation with the duration and scope of thaumaturgy" instead of a modified form of thaumaturgy. ;)
-
Thanks, I understand where your interpretation stems from now. Are you adding control roll to power for the effective number of shifts? If not, it seems too weak to be useful. If you are, I'd call it "evocation with the duration and scope of thaumaturgy" instead of a modified form of thaumaturgy. ;)
I'm not sure what you mean by this. My take is that you do it exactly as you would a normal evocation. First you gather power -- figure out complexity, rename that number "shifts of power", then compare it to your conviction (plus any applicable power specializations). Pay the required mental stress. Then make a Discipline roll to control those shifts (adding in any applicable control specializations). Note that since the Sponsored Magic is considered an additional element, I assume that you can buy specializations for that element, assuming your template allowed for specializations. Note also that just because you have the option of fast-casting spells that would normally require Thaumaturgy, this doesn't mean that you have to. Sponsored Magic is channeling+ritual+extra benefits, so you can always fall back on casting the spell as a plain old ritual. But while Dresden would have to brew up a potion give someone faster running speed, a Summer caster could simply breath speed into them (Biomancy cast as Evocation).
And by the way, I'm not trying to say that there's any hard limit to how powerful a spell you can cast, just that a complexity 26 thaum-as-evo spell would be just as difficult as a 26-shift attack evocation would be -- and probably not an option for most spellcasters.
-
I'm not sure what you mean by this. My take is that you do it exactly as you would a normal evocation.
With evocation the resulting effect is decided by power plus control. With thaumaturgy the resulting effect is power. It sounds like you're going with the evocation model (which is what I was asking).
And by the way, I'm not trying to say that there's any hard limit to how powerful a spell you can cast, just that a complexity 26 thaum-as-evo spell would be just as difficult as a 26-shift attack evocation would be -- and probably not an option for most spellcasters.
I agree, there's no real hard limit but there is a functional limit to what you can do in one exchange. That's true whether it's evocation, thaumaturgy at evocation speeds, or evocation with thaumaturgy's scope. ;)
-
Additionally UmbraLux if one reads further into the sidebar on YS288 they go on to discuss why one would want this since mechanically evocation and thaumaturgy are capable of similar things. If mental stress was a difference I would expect them to state that as one of the advantages. Instead they simply state that thaumaturgy requires less rationalization to do many of the things that are difficult to simply throw around as evocation effects.
I don't know if the point is necessary but I figured I'd make it anyway.
-
The thing baking my noodle is: can you use EvoThaum to automatically hit someone for whom you have taken a sympathetic link (via a Maneuver)?
-
With evocation the resulting effect is decided by power plus control. With thaumaturgy the resulting effect is power. It sounds like you're going with the evocation model (which is what I was asking).
Well, it's power plus control for attacks. Other things go off of just power, with the control roll being mostly irrelevant.
The thing baking my noodle is: can you use EvoThaum to automatically hit someone for whom you have taken a sympathetic link (via a Maneuver)?
Hit? No. Attack, yes, but they'd still get to defend with *something*. Perhaps endurance.
Edit: Rules Fail - evothaum is limited to line of sight, see YS288.
-
Additionally UmbraLux if one reads further into the sidebar on YS288 they go on to discuss why one would want this since mechanically evocation and thaumaturgy are capable of similar things. If mental stress was a difference I would expect them to state that as one of the advantages. Instead they simply state that thaumaturgy requires less rationalization to do many of the things that are difficult to simply throw around as evocation effects.
Conversely, I expect them to default to what they're calling it unless specified otherwise. ;)
The thing baking my noodle is: can you use EvoThaum to automatically hit someone for whom you have taken a sympathetic link (via a Maneuver)?
Thaumaturgy does have to account for defenses and rolls - read the section on take outs via thaumaturgy. So they would get a defense of some sort.
-
Conversely, I expect them to default to what they're calling it unless specified otherwise. ;)
They call it 'Thaumaturgy with Evocation's methods and speed'.
The manner by which Evocation summons power is part of Evocation's methods.
Paying an amount of mental stress based on how much power you call up relative to your Conviction is an integral part of how Evocation summons power.
It's not in the least bit contradictory, and requires the most literalistic interpretation of the rules to deny - a denial that can be summed up by, 'they didn't spell it out in every excruciating detail, so it doesn't count'.
Apply that same standard to Beast Change and an entire substantial limitation simply evaporates into rules-meaningless gobbledygook (see the recent thread 'Skill Categories').
-
About compels:
Hm. I don't like that at all. But it is indeed the rules. Thanks for pointing that out - I had skimmed that very page previously in search of something relevant but I missed the commentary.
About mental stress for evothaum:
Little about evothaum is mechanically clear. What specializations do you use? How long do its effects last? Etc.
Nonetheless, I feel confident in saying that it costs mental stress. Making it not do so is terrible in three ways:
1. It's not what the rules say at all, as far as I can tell.
2. It's way too powerful.
3. It's narratively inappropriate.
The first problem is simple and I don't think I need to elaborate.
The second should become clear when you consider the way that everyone reacts to anything that loosens the four-spells-before-consequences limit. While evothaum can't do much damage, it can toss out even more effective blocks than Evocation can. And magical grapples are arguably better than attacks anyway.
Also, if evothaum costs no mental stress, then it's very easy and quick to do. Evocations take only seconds, and by removing the mental stress cost you remove the pain involved in casting them. So what stops a wizard from sitting down and casting twenty evo-rituals every minute?
The third point relates to the fact that sponsored folks generally don't cast twenty rituals per minute. The behaviour that you encourage with the way you interpret powers should be the behaviour that people are expected to display in-game. Our current rules encourage people to play like actual Dresdenverse wizards, and that should stay that way.
In other words, I agree with Tedronai.
-
About compels:
Hm. I don't like that at all. But it is indeed the rules. Thanks for pointing that out - I had skimmed that very page previously in search of something relevant but I missed the commentary.
It fits, though. Having access to sponsor debt as a mechanic improves your flexibility - allowing you to use fate points you don't even have (yet). This is the price of that: it can end up costing you more in the long run.
Which really fits in with their design of compels in general: the price is always higher than the benefit. For example:
An aspect invoke is +2 on a roll (or reroll the dice). A compel is an automatic failure with no roll even allowed, and typically with an additional complication - like setting the building on fire because you missed with your attack spell.
An invoke for effect lets you show up to a scene. A compel (and yes, this is an actual example from the books) might cause you to unintentionally stand up your girlfriend... because you were ambushed and kidnapped on the way there, automatically losing what would otherwise be an entire scene's worth of conflict.
-
The thing baking my noodle is: can you use EvoThaum to automatically hit someone for whom you have taken a sympathetic link (via a Maneuver)?
I vote "Yes", but only technically so. Because one of the capabilities of Thaumaturgy (which gets inherited by EvoThaum) is to wrap up an effective attack roll into the complexity of the spell. I've already talked about how the ultimate expression of this -- the complexity 26 or so conflict-in-a-single-spell -- is technically possible but impractical due to the control roll. But you could presumeably due lesser versions of this (ie, the 'inflict a serious consequence' sorts of thaum spells).
So what would this look like? Say I'm the Summer Knight and I'm using the happy-fun-sparkly Summer Magic to ... oh, say shove a bit of the summer sun up a Red Court Vampire's ... uh ... gut. Looking at doing this with Thaum, I would note that 8 shifts (beyond the attack roll) would be enough to either inflict a serious or a mild+moderate against the vampire (Hey, look! Sunlight satisfies The Catch! Whee!), and I decide that's good enough for now. I also need to account for the RCVs defence, which seems as though it would be based on Endurance. He can roll up to a 6, so I'd need complexity of 14, which means EvoThaum would need 14 shifts of power to do this, and it would count as an attack hitting with an attack roll of 6 and weapon rating of 8 (sun). Tough for most character-level wizards without taking a few consequences themselves. A lesser version of this could guarantee a mild consequence for 10 shifts of power. Of course, if the RCV did poorly on his roll, he might well take a greater consequence, but darn it, these things sometimes happen...
Most of the time, just casting it as an Evocation would be more effective. After all, if you had the skills to pull off a control roll of 10, then casting a 10-shift attack evocation would inflict at least 14 stress even on the best possible deffense roll. That's enough for a mild+moderate+severe on that RCV (assuming he is enough of an NPC to even take that many consequences!) Of course, the EvoThaum option gives you the flexibility of not needing proximity or line of sight, which is a nice bonus (assuming you have the required link, of course).
At least, that's my take on the situation.
-
...literalistic interpretation of the rules to deny - a denial that can be summed up by, 'they didn't spell it out in every excruciating detail, so it doesn't count'.
Apply that same standard to Beast Change and an entire substantial limitation simply evaporates into rules-meaningless gobbledygook (see the recent thread 'Skill Categories').
Meh. Don't know where you're going with Beast Change but not sure I care. As for being literal, I write too many technical and process documents to approach a "system specification document" (which is what a game manual is) in any other way. Besides, you know what assumptions do, right? ;)
In other words, I agree with Tedronai.
So you've changed your mind since stating:Evothaum is not strictly better than evocation. Evocations, unlike rituals, have weapon ratings.
Or did I misunderstand your initial position?
So what would this look like? Say I'm the Summer Knight and I'm using the happy-fun-sparkly Summer Magic to ... oh, say shove a bit of the summer sun up a Red Court Vampire's ... uh ... gut. Looking at doing this with Thaum, I would note that 8 shifts (beyond the attack roll) would be enough to either inflict a serious or a mild+moderate against the vampire (Hey, look! Sunlight satisfies The Catch! Whee!), and I decide that's good enough for now. I also need to account for the RCVs defence, which seems as though it would be based on Endurance. He can roll up to a 6, so I'd need complexity of 14, which means EvoThaum would need 14 shifts of power to do this, and it would count as an attack hitting with an attack roll of 6 and weapon rating of 8 (sun). Tough for most character-level wizards without taking a few consequences themselves. A lesser version of this could guarantee a mild consequence for 10 shifts of power. Of course, if the RCV did poorly on his roll, he might well take a greater consequence, but darn it, these things sometimes happen...
I'm confused...this is pretty much how I envision thaumaturgy at evocation's speed working. I thought you were treating it as evocation with a separate targeting/control roll adding to attacks?
-
The Beast Change thing: Specifies that you can't increase non-physical skills. However, there is no definition (anywhere) of what a physical skill is, and many skills include trappings that are both physical (accuracy of weapons attacks) and non-physical (knowledge of weapon types). This is endemic to the rules book: attempting to treat it as a technically accurate "system specification document" isn't going to work - because it's very clearly not; they make frequent use of common sense terms that are potentially ambiguous if you aim a big enough magnifying glass at them, but which will simply make immediate sense to most people.
So, here's a (hopefully) technically accurate description of evothaum, as I'd interpret it.
1) it has some thematic limitations appropriate to the relevant sponsor or type of evothaum.
2) the effect functions exactly as thaumaturgy - figure out what you want, and determine the needed complexity to do it.
3) once you know the complexity you need, this becomes the required power for an evocation spell.
4) call up power based on conviction, spending mental stress as normal for an evocation effect of the given power.
5) roll control; excess control does nothing; insufficient control results in backlash or fallout as normal for evocation.
6) apply resulting effect as if it had been generated by a thaumaturgical ritual of complexity equal to the total power controlled (which may be less than you wanted if there was fallout.)
This definition, to the best of my understanding, matches what's being used by Tedronai, Sanctaphrax, and Becq. (If I'm incorrect on any of those, please let me know!)
-
The Beast Change thing: Specifies that you can't increase non-physical skills. However, there is no definition (anywhere) of what a physical skill is, and many skills include trappings that are both physical (accuracy of weapons attacks) and non-physical (knowledge of weapon types).
Thanks for the explanation.
This is endemic to the rules book: attempting to treat it as a technically accurate "system specification document" isn't going to work - because it's very clearly not; they make frequent use of common sense terms that are potentially ambiguous if you aim a big enough magnifying glass at them, but which will simply make immediate sense to most people.
A lack of clarity in the writing is the only major issue I have with DFRPG. Since that seems to affect online discussions far more than play, I won't complain too often. :)
So, here's a (hopefully) technically accurate description of evothaum, as I'd interpret it.
1) it has some thematic limitations appropriate to the relevant sponsor or type of evothaum.
2) the effect functions exactly as thaumaturgy - figure out what you want, and determine the needed complexity to do it.
3) once you know the complexity you need, this becomes the required power for an evocation spell.
4) call up power based on conviction, spending mental stress as normal for an evocation effect of the given power.
5) roll control; excess control does nothing; insufficient control results in backlash or fallout as normal for evocation.
6) apply resulting effect as if it had been generated by a thaumaturgical ritual of complexity equal to the total power controlled (which may be less than you wanted if there was fallout.)
In broad terms, the only item I do differently is number 4. I leave it using Lore and don't add mental stress.
This definition, to the best of my understanding, matches what's being used by Tedronai, Sanctaphrax, and Becq. (If I'm incorrect on any of those, please let me know!)
If it is, I've misinterpreted a few posts - for which I apologize. My understanding was that some modified the control roll in item 5 to add to attacks / resisted spells.
-
The biggest problem there is, your proposed evothaum mechanics don't even match the methods of thaumaturgy, let alone evocation. Lore is never used to call up power. It is used to set a limit on thaumaturgy complexity before you need more than minimal preparation (and I've seen some people try to apply that same limit to evothaum; I don't, but I can understand the argument in favor of it). But even for thaumaturgy, when you actually cast the spell, you're calling up power based on conviction - just usually in much smaller chunks over several exchanges.
Basically, I see my definition as: speed of evocation, methods of evocation, effect of thaumaturgy. Your definition has the speed of evocation, the methods of nothing-in-the-rulebook, and the effect of thaumaturgy. Even if you adjust your definition to "power up to conviction at no mental stress" - well, then you'd have speed of evocation, methods of thaumaturgy, which is still not the decription given for evothaum.
edit:
If it is, I've misinterpreted a few posts - for which I apologize. My understanding was that some modified the control roll in item 5 to add to attacks / resisted spells.
Hm. You may be right here, that some people modify that. I wouldn't; if you want an attack spell, evocation will just be better than a similar evothaum spell (assuming that it's within the realm of evocation at all - i.e. not a transformation based "attack" or other effect that's beyond evocation's brute force results. Otherwise, evothaum obviously wins over evocation, for the simple fact of being able to, say, work through a sympathetic connection at all.)
-
The biggest problem there is, your proposed evothaum mechanics don't even match the methods of thaumaturgy, let alone evocation. Lore is never used to call up power. It is used to set a limit on thaumaturgy complexity before you need more than minimal preparation (and I've seen some people try to apply that same limit to evothaum; I don't, but I can understand the argument in favor of it). But even for thaumaturgy, when you actually cast the spell, you're calling up power based on conviction - just usually in much smaller chunks over several exchanges.
Thaumaturgy explicitly "allows the wizard the luxury of drawing power from sources other than himself..." (YS261) There's no mention of Conviction under "How to do it" on YS262. Lore (and aspects or consequences if necessary) sets up sources of power and Discipline channels it. It also states "...casting process is identical to the process for evocation" after having decided the number of shifts / complexity which I link to step 4* on YS250 under Evocation's "How to do it". That step also does not mention Conviction.
Lore isn't the source of power for thaumaturgy, it's how you know where to get the power. What symbols to draw, what elements to call on, perhaps even a Name of Power. In my interpretation of the text, this doesn't change just because you're doing it faster. Which means thaumaturgy at evocation's speed will seldom be much more powerful than the character's Lore skill plus any applicable foci or specialties. There's simply not much time to put towards thaumaturgy style aspect creation & use.
*If you link it to step 3, you're back to deciding number of shifts again. Additionally, it would lead to taking mental stress during each exchange of calling power in normal thaumaturgy.
...the methods of nothing-in-the-rulebook...
Sigh. The world is bigger than one person. There's room for differences in opinion. Even for different interpretations of the same text.
-
I haven't changed my mind about evothaum's effects lately.
I don't think Tedronai said anything about evothaum being strictly better than Evocation...I just meant that I agree with him that it should cost mental stress.
wyvern's summary looks fairly fair to me.
I agree that the frequent vagueness of YS is annoying.
-
You have to go a few pages further to the actual casting of the ritual, Umbra. Check the "For quick reference" sidebar on page YS271. It explicitly states that when casting the ritual one must call up power like in evocation, costing 1 mental stress for each shift that you summon beyond your Conviction. The stuff that you are looking at earlier deals only with the preparation aspect of thaumaturgy.
Additionally Wyvern, EvoThaum still requires line of sight. It's the first thing on the list of differences between Thaum and EvoThaum.
-
You have to go a few pages further to the actual casting of the ritual, Umbra. Check the "For quick reference" sidebar on page YS271. It explicitly states that when casting the ritual one must call up power like in evocation, costing 1 mental stress for each shift that you summon beyond your Conviction. The stuff that you are looking at earlier deals only with the preparation aspect of thaumaturgy.
Sure, I agree. I'm simply objecting to the 'take a mental stress whether it's over Conviction or not' - as if it were evocation.
-
Additionally Wyvern, EvoThaum still requires line of sight. It's the first thing on the list of differences between Thaum and EvoThaum.
Ah. Well. That's what I get for trying to answer questions without the actual rulebooks on me. >.< Prior posts edited to remove or at least point out this particular rules fail on my part.
On actually double-checking the rulebook, I think the text at the bottom of the YS288 sidebar is overall the best defense against this whole stress-less evothaum notion: "What the power source is offering in this specific case, then, is a broadening of what you don't have to rationalize." I.E. the advantage is available effects, not free spellcasting.
-
Umbra-As I understood it you were debating whether step 4 (calling up power based on conviction) was part of thaumaturgy at all. I was showing where in the book it was discussed.
Wyvern-That's the exact point I made a bit ago though less verbose.
-
If it is, I've misinterpreted a few posts - for which I apologize. My understanding was that some modified the control roll in item 5 to add to attacks / resisted spells.
My take is that the effects of EvoThaum are handled exactly as the equivalent Thaum spell. That is, the caster needs to 'buy' his roll as part of the creation of the spell -- though unless the spell is built as a guaranteed takeout, the defender will still roll (which could cause the spell effect to vary). Thaumaturgy explicitly "allows the wizard the luxury of drawing power from sources other than himself..." (YS261) There's no mention of Conviction under "How to do it" on YS262.
Yes. But EvoThaum is cast using Evocation's methods once complexity is determined then translated into Evocation-style shifts. When you're casting EvoThaum, you are sacrificing that luxury, in effect, because you aren't taking the time to painstakingly build up the spell construct and allow power to seep into it.You have to go a few pages further to the actual casting of the ritual, Umbra. Check the "For quick reference" sidebar on page YS271. It explicitly states that when casting the ritual one must call up power like in evocation, costing 1 mental stress for each shift that you summon beyond your Conviction. The stuff that you are looking at earlier deals only with the preparation aspect of thaumaturgy.
Oh, nice catch! Even is baseline Thaumaturgy you need to pay mentals for going over conviction in a given control roll, and since EvoThaum is a single control roll, that makes it a slam-dunk. As to the intitial base mental stress ... well, I guess if a table decided to play without it, it wouldn't make a great deal of difference. I still believe that the fact that it is cast using Evocation's method (and the explanations that follow) means that you pay stress as you would for an Evocation, but ... *shrug*.
Additionally Wyvern, EvoThaum still requires line of sight. It's the first thing on the list of differences between Thaum and EvoThaum.
Wow. I totally missed that, despite it being very clear. :o