I'd really like to know what you guys think.
So, I, like many other posters on this board, have a problem with not being able to tell my players the "limit" of their Thaumaturgical might. Or, rather, that if they have enough time, there is no limit at all.
So, instead, I've instituted limit on the number of exchanges that one has to control the power of a spell:
When performing a thaumaturgic ritual, you have a number of exchanges equal to twice your Lore skill in order to control the energies in your spell. Other practitioners may aid you in gathering and controlling these energies, contributing up to their Lore skill in power, provided they can control it in two exchanges.
I know this means that Sells couldn't possibly pull off his spell, but I think it balances things nicely.
If anyone has any suggestions, please let me know (I'd really like a way to examples from the book, like Sells exploding heart spells and summoning the Erlking, to work but be extraordinary exceptions).
The base time for thaumaturgy control rolls is "a few moments" (one combat exchange). However, for a given spell, each additional control roll after the first incurs a cumulative penalty of either +1 to the difficulty of the roll or +1 step on the time chart (the caster chooses the split of penalty points between difficulty and time for each roll). For example, a wizard might choose +1 difficulty for the second roll, then +2 difficulty for the third roll, then switch to +3 steps on the time chart for the fourth roll -- perhaps because he just spend his last fate point to succeed at the previous roll.
End result: simple spells (like Harry's tracking spell) can be cast very quickly (no prep time, and as little as one combat exchange for control). Complex spells take exponentially longer and/or carry high risk of failure. Example: even if a caster controlled 3 shifts per roll, a 20-shift spell would take around an hour and a half (with the last roll controlling 2 shifts at a +1 difficulty).
The reason I 'sneakily' limited thaumaturgy power by refresh was that I saw that higher refresh characters didn't tend to have majorly better skills, but were supposed to (potentially) be much better at thaumaturgy.
As I see it, Thaumaturgy has five real problems:
1. Sacrifices are too good.
2. Control is useless once you have 5 points of it.
3. Complexity is not that important for the really big rituals.
4. No rules for the amount of time taken to cast a ritual.
5. Big rituals are probably too easy.
What is your revision, again?
I believe point 3 was in reference to base complexity (Lore+Specialization+Focus). At least, that's a problem that I see with high end rituals. Once you're already dropping 20 or 30 or 40 shifts worth of declarations/maneuvers/consequences/etc, those 6 or 7 shifts that you likely started with just don't seem all that meaningful anymore, comparatively.
Do your players really create characters that would level cities?
If so, do they have an actual reason to do it?
Ah, I understand. And I concur, that is a bit strange. If you want to have thaumaturgy experts like that, this is absolutely going to need some reworking. On the other hand, there is quite a bit to say for 8+ shift skill replacement rituals without prep.I believe point 3 was in reference to base complexity (Lore+Specialization+Focus). At least, that's a problem that I see with high end rituals. Once you're already dropping 20 or 30 or 40 shifts worth of declarations/maneuvers/consequences/etc, those 6 or 7 shifts that you likely started with just don't seem all that meaningful anymore, comparatively.Exactly what I meant.
Ideally, really big rituals would mostly be for people who've invested heavily in Thaumaturgical power. But by the RAW, that is not so.
The rest of Haru's post demonstrates the problems I was talking about very nicely.I don't really see them as houserules as such. For example, nowhere in the RAW does it say you can double(triple, quadruple, etc.)-dip on your consequences taken to power up a spell. Yes, it explicitly states the "20 shifts per dead body" thing, which is incredibly broken for powering a spell, but on the other hand it will push the wizard over the edge for good, no matter what he is using the spell for. That should definitely have an impact on the game, either it makes the character incompatible with the rest of the group (a warlock with a KotC), or it shifts the focus of the game, making it darker, maybe entering a "what's right vs. what's necessary" debate. If that isn't something the table wants to, then that should be discussed in a situation like this.
First of all, he recommends instituting a couple of house rules that makes sacrifices less powerful. They happen to be more or less the same house rules that I'd recommend.
Then he explains that time constraints should be important, backing up my point that there should actually be time constraints.I think we mean a different thing, when we say time constraints. You are saying, that the ritual itself, the gathering of power, actually casting the spell should take up a fixed amount of time. I am saying, that the preparation is a much bigger part of that, both supported by the RAW and the novels. You can let your characters do a few declarations to have a handful of aspects for their ritual, or you can make them work their asses off for them. Instead of letting them buy a bunch of aspects at walmart, you can say "You know, you get a few candles and chalk and whatnot, but for a ritual that big, they won't be that useful. That's one 'cheap ritual equipment' aspect, nothing more."
Then he gets sidetracked by my poor wording. Sorry about that, Haru.The thing is, I don't see the problem you guys seem to be having, because I haven't run into it yet. At the moment I'm trying to understand it, which is bound to carry with it quite a few misconceptions and misunderstandings, so no harm done.
Then he explains that, by the RAW, you can't really have a story where Wizards cast rituals unopposed. Which is a real shame, since unopposed rituals make good stories and are a staple of the novels. Because magic is, in theory, difficult enough that the process of casting it is a good story in itself.Not really what I'm saying. On the contrary, I talked about the Earlking summoning twice, and it is a very good example of an unopposed ritual. But that happens at the "speed of plot", I don't see the need of putting up a time constraint there. Depending on the rules proposed in this thread, it would have taken Harry weeks to perform this ritual, if he would have been able to do so at all. I just don't see the ritual itself all that interesting. It is everything around it, that makes it interesting. Look at it. Harry talks a whole lot about preparing the spell, putting down the barbed wire ring, the items he has chosen to represent himself and the earlking, the energies of the day fading away and the night coming in all wild and untamed, those are all great declarations and maneuvers that help to reach the high complexity he needs. All of that takes up way more pages than when he is actually gathering up the energy for the spell.
The whole point of a balanced game is to prevent the GM from needing to whack things into shape with his limitless power, after all.Yes, but the more open a system is, the more the balance relies upon the open discussion between the involved parties. A system like D&D, where every possible spell is listed in the books, and there is nothing besides that is a way to balance a magic system without involving the GM. A spell can do what is listed in its writeup, and that is that, there is nothing to argue. For both sides, actually, if a GM doesn't like a spell, there is little he can do beside the ban hammer.
PS:As long as they want to do a city-leveling-ritual but don't go through with it, I again don't see the problem. I've joked about a lot of nonsense actions in my time as a player. If they really want to push something like this, then it is going to be come a problem, absolutely.
Yes.
No.
So they do other stuff instead. More useful stuff.
Blowing up a city with a big ritual is like beating someone to death with the Mona Lisa; impractical and a horrible waste of potential.That is a great picture. And a statement I agree with. Which is another part of my argument. I would say we are playing this game (or any game) to have fun. If a part of the game is lame, then why would you even use it? This goes back to my argument above. If you are playing with a "GM vs. Players" mindset, the players are going to feel the need to take the safest, not the coolest or most interesting route. Now I'm not saying that that is what you want to do, but talking about something like this is a rare case on the tables I've played, and I myself have been burned pretty good when trying to put the rule of cool to use as a player.
Thaumaturgy can do essentially anything. Killing people is a pretty lame way to use it.
On the other hand, there is quite a bit to say for 8+ shift skill replacement rituals without prep.
I don't really see them as houserules as such.
Yes, it explicitly states the "20 shifts per dead body" thing, which is incredibly broken for powering a spell, but on the other hand it will push the wizard over the edge for good, no matter what he is using the spell for.
I think we mean a different thing, when we say time constraints. You are saying, that the ritual itself, the gathering of power, actually casting the spell should take up a fixed amount of time. I am saying, that the preparation is a much bigger part of that, both supported by the RAW and the novels.
On the contrary, I talked about the Earlking summoning twice, and it is a very good example of an unopposed ritual. But that happens at the "speed of plot", I don't see the need of putting up a time constraint there. Depending on the rules proposed in this thread, it would have taken Harry weeks to perform this ritual, if he would have been able to do so at all. I just don't see the ritual itself all that interesting. It is everything around it, that makes it interesting. Look at it. Harry talks a whole lot about preparing the spell, putting down the barbed wire ring, the items he has chosen to represent himself and the earlking, the energies of the day fading away and the night coming in all wild and untamed, those are all great declarations and maneuvers that help to reach the high complexity he needs. All of that takes up way more pages than when he is actually gathering up the energy for the spell.
What I meant with what I said is, that if you are not opposed, nothing is going to stop you from casting the spell. You can take your time and play it safe. There is no need to know how much time casting the spell is going to take. 5 minutes, 20 minutes, 2 hours, is it really going to make a difference, if you are not working against a clock?
Eb drops a satellite
Yes, but the more open a system is, the more the balance relies upon the open discussion between the involved parties. A system like D&D, where every possible spell is listed in the books, and there is nothing besides that is a way to balance a magic system without involving the GM. A spell can do what is listed in its writeup, and that is that, there is nothing to argue. For both sides, actually, if a GM doesn't like a spell, there is little he can do beside the ban hammer.
I know I'm nagging on this, but would you mind providing an actual example of this happening? At the moment I imagine something like this:
GM: So you hear about this vampire nest in New Orleans
P1: Nah, I'd like to go and destroy Baltimore with a giant ritual, who's game?
P2: I'm in.
P3: Yeah, let's do that!
Which is very odd, and I can't imagine it happening quite like this, that's why I'm asking.
If a part of the game is lame, then why would you even use it?
in the novels. Nothing was opposing him, as far as we can tell. But a normal wizard couldn't have done it. At least not fast enough for it to matter without making massive sacrifices.
The rules should support that.
The explosion is considered to be the loudest sound ever heard in modern history, with reports of it being heard nearly 3,000 miles (4,800 km) from its point of origin.
... the eruption was equivalent to 200 megatons of TNT ...
Estimates of the energy of the blast range from 5 to as high as 30 megatons of TNT (21–130 PJ),[7][8] with 10–15 megatons of TNT (42–63 PJ) the most likely
agree with most of what you said, but I was under the impression that
This is enough to make me think that revision of the Thaum mechanics are a Good Thing.
And I see nothing wrong with the field of giants resurrection. It was a well written ritual from prep to finish, I see nothing to object. Plus she left her blood on every last one of them, and I would love to have that turn around on her. Yes, you could set it up to be a hundred shifts or more, but how much is the actual accomplishment worth? Would it bring her into debt with her sponsor? In trouble even, if the giants do something wrong?
Did it hurt the story? That would be my only objection. I haven't read the whole story, only a short section before and after the ritual, and it seemed to fit into it rather nicely.
And this is sort of what I meant by "unopposed", too. If a ritual is unopposed, the only reason you are doing it is its importance to the story for one reason or another.
I think part of the problem is context.This.
It didn't hurt the story at all, but the game's inability to model the event properly hurt my fun.Now this I can understand, even if I don't feel like this myself.
Plus it's bad for my suspension of disbelief. Which is important.
The RAW don't make that so, so the RAW should step aside and let houserules improve things.Absolutely. Like I said before, my main goal was to understand where exactly your problems are with this, and I think we finally arrived at that point. Thank you for the discussion.
I think part of the problem is context. It's like saying that a good carpet bombing can make trivial many small scale combats, and it can. But carpet bombing is hardly the solution to everything.
So, if you are playing magic-noir cops and robbers, then you agree to keep all the big things off that table, because that's not really part of magic-noir cops and robbers. If you instead want to play magic-noir diplomacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomacy_%28game%29), or magic-noir global thermonuclear war, then the constraints you operate under are considerably different.
So, as long as the thaumaturgy rules generally prevent chumps from brewing up nukes in their bathtubs and don't let BMX Bandit and Angel Summoner cost the same amount of refresh, I'll be happy.
And the threat of nuclear war is unconvincing to me, because the best rituals are not all that offensive. If I want to Conjure a private island with an 80-shift Ward that lasts 200 years and checks everyone to see if they should be allowed in with a 40-shift Divination, that's not going to make people want to kill me.
I don't have an idea for a quick fix for this one. The first person you kill for bonus complexity should be a big deal, otherwise, why do it? But the 347th person you kill for a ritual should probably matter a lot less.
I made no real provisions for other people to help you with ritual preparation, only during actually casting the ritual
When I wrote it, I was more interested in limiting the complexity you could do in minutes/hours because I saw those time periods as the two most likely blocks of time you'd have available during a story. So, for example, I didn't change how added complexity from refinement works because it increased the complexity of the stuff you could do quickly, and I thought that that was the thing people would be most interested in.