ParanetOnline
The Dresden Files => DFRPG => Topic started by: austiknight on March 23, 2013, 05:24:56 AM
-
Howdy folks,
So I've sort of wondered at the weakness of Channeling compared to Evocation for only 1 point of refresh. Just that Evocation comes with 2 more elements (2 points worth of Refinement) and a Specialization (1 point worth of Refinement). Additionally, Channeling doesn't allow Refinement for anything except items. It seems that to be an effective specialized Fire mage, you'd need to take Evocation rather than Channeling: Fire. Thoughts?
And sorry if this has been discussed before. I was unable to find it.
-
In the long term an evoker will be stronger because of those refinements that can also be put into specialization.
In a low power game channeling works great, and takes less Refresh.
-
Agreed - though if you want to be a Fire mage austiknight all you have to do is take Evocation and then specialize via foci and refinements. It ultimately pays to specialize, in the long run.
-
Howdy folks,
So I've sort of wondered at the weakness of Channeling compared to Evocation for only 1 point of refresh. Just that Evocation comes with 2 more elements (2 points worth of Refinement) and a Specialization (1 point worth of Refinement). Additionally, Channeling doesn't allow Refinement for anything except items. It seems that to be an effective specialized Fire mage, you'd need to take Evocation rather than Channeling: Fire. Thoughts?
And sorry if this has been discussed before. I was unable to find it.
I'm not perfectly sure you're doing the math right, but I might have misunderstood what you meant.
Review of relevant power costs (for the moment, just assume this character does not have Ritual/Thaumaturgy/Sponsored Magic):
Channeling (Fire) - 2 refresh - ability to use evocation to manipulate fire only, 2 focus item slots, may take Refinement, but only for more focus item slots
Evocation - 3 refresh - ability to use evocation to manipulate 3 of the 5 elements, 1 point of evocation specialization, 2 focus item slots, may take Refinement
Refinement - 1 refresh - several options (choose one from the list):
- 2 additional focus item slots (only valid choice if you have Channeling)
- 2 additional points of evocation specializations
- 1 additional evocation element, and 1 point of evocation specialization within that element
(Common house rules let you put the point of specialization in option 3 into a different element, and/or add option 4: 1 additional focus item slot and 1 additional point of specialization.)
So, for one additional refresh, Evocation gives you 2 additional elements, 1 point of specialization, and more options when you take Refinement. Without getting too much into the debatable issue of whether 1 additional element is worth exactly half a point of Refinement or somewhat less than that, you get about 1.5 points of refresh plus more options from Refinement when you spend 1 refresh to upgrade from Channeling to Evocation. In my opinion, this is a good deal, though not mandatory for every character or absolutely essential to get immediately. Channeling is a very solid power even without the upgrade to Evocation.
-
True. I guess if you wanted to allow it, you could always houserule that Channelers can take Refinement for specializations.
It just seems counterintuitive to me that someone with just Evocation will come out of the gate as a better fire (or whatever) mage than a focused practitioner while also having more options. Again, nothing that couldn't be fixed by houseruling.
-
Taking specializations in Channeling is difficult because of the way the skill pyramid works and there's only two things to specialize in, control and power. If you ignore the pyramid scheme you will unbalance the character in relation to other characters. There's always the alternative way to do evocation though. Create a different set of elements.
For Fire it could be a list like, Heat, Light, Consumption, Electricity, Magnetism, etc.
Each element in normal evocation doubles as an Aspect, so just find the individual Aspects of fire and make them the new elements of your reskinned evocation. This way you get to do all that specialization from Refinements and you are arguably the best at Fire.
-
Another thing you could do is stick with the original elements and interpret them all in light of fire. Water could give you plasma, or earth could give you lava, etc, and basically you say you studied the other elements to reach a broader and deeper understanding of your chosen favorite.
-
Thanks. I was just using fire as an example, but I guess it's not that big of a deal. It just seems off to me that generalists are stronger than specialists even in their specialization (in this very narrow example). I assume that's just because I've mostly played D&D and M&M where narrow characters were imba.
And I'd forgotten about the Specialization pyramid. That would make it a shade more problematic to have a specialist mage who could keep up with a wizard without ruining all balance. Lol.
-
No problem, I remember running up against the same wall.
Basically the justification I use is that evokers are more powerful for the same reasons the "broader" scope of a liberal arts education are supposed to be better. Exposure to lots of different things leads to deeper understanding and appreciation of your interests.
And if you don't mind the reference, it's like how Uncle Iroh studied water bending and came up with lightning deflection as a result...
-
And if you don't mind the reference, it's like how Uncle Iroh studied water bending and came up with lightning deflection as a result...
HA!
Also I like what you have said Mrm. I may use something like this in a new build. Keep in mind to that you don't have to use those five elements, Dresden uses them because he was classically trained in the European style. It could be possible to have more elements than just five as well
-
Thanks. I was just using fire as an example, but I guess it's not that big of a deal. It just seems off to me that generalists are stronger than specialists even in their specialization (in this very narrow example). I assume that's just because I've mostly played D&D and M&M where narrow characters were imba.
And I'd forgotten about the Specialization pyramid. That would make it a shade more problematic to have a specialist mage who could keep up with a wizard without ruining all balance. Lol.
In the DFRPG, the Channeling/Evocation distinction isn't really supposed to reflect the D&D distinction between a specialist wizard and a generalist. A Channeler only has a partial/stunted understanding of Evocation; his skills in manipulating power are narrower because they are incomplete. A full Evoker has a more complete understanding of Evocation's powers; he just needs training (Refinement) to master the remaining details.
Mechanically, sometimes a Channeler is going to have to work really hard at justifying why his element can accomplish a given task. With a good enough explanation, most elements can be used to do most things, but there may be a few tasks that are so obviously tied to one or two specific elements that if you have a different one, you're out of luck. If you've got full Evocation, you probably still specialize in a particular element, but with your two backup elements thrown in, it shouldn't be hard to come up with an appropriate spell for any occasion. (The sidebar on YS254, "Mommy, Where Does Lightning Come From?" addresses the overlap issue, and says either air or earth can generate lightning. If you only have Channeling (Spirit), no lightning spells for you.)
It could be possible to have more elements than just five as well
I'd really suggest sticking to a five-element paradigm. Adding more elements changes the game balance by making Evocation (and especially Channeling) weaker than intended. Conversely, moving to a three- or four-element paradigm would make Evocation (and Channeling) more powerful than intended.
-
I find that statement false especially where a previous poster designed a one element system for evocation
-
I find that statement false especially where a previous poster designed a one element system for evocation
Clearly, you didn't understand what I wrote--or for that matter, what Mrmdubois was suggesting.
Evocation in the RAW divides up every action that can be taken with on-the-fly energy manipulation into a five-element paradigm modeled off the Greek elements plus spirit. The important point is that each action that can be taken using Evocation has a natural home in one (sometimes more than one) element. A character with Evocation starts with access to three of five elements (60%) and a bonus in one of five elements (20%). If you change the number of total elements to six, a character would only start with access to 50% of the elements, with a bonus in 17% of them. This more limited access is weaker than the RAW, and therefore the game balance value of Evocation is less.
One of Mrmdubois's suggestions was to reskin all of Evocation with a fire theme, and then subdivide it into five fire-related elements. This is not "one-element Evocation," so long as the reskinned Evocation can still do everything normal Evocation can. The suggestion was cosmetic, not mechanical.
-
That's true. No offense.
-
I can't link it because I'm on my phone, but there I'd a power on the custom power thread I like to bring up when this question comes up.
I believe it's listed as Superior Pyromancy, though it can apply to any element. While it may not bring specalists totally up to par with a Wizard, it let's them do things Wizards can't normally do. Such as Thaumaturgy at Evocation speed, 1 point of refinement in power and control, and the ability to take sponsor debt. It costs 3 or 4 refresh I think. Nothng game breaking, but it does allow specalists to diverge from their wizard counterparts a bit.
-
Oh yeah, I've seen that one. It seems pricey to me but honestly I wouldn't know.
-
Oh yeah, I've seen that one. It seems pricey to me but honestly I wouldn't know.
Funny i said the same thing when I first saw it. But really it gives the same benefits as sponsored magic for the same cost. You're basically getting a refinement for free in exchange for having an exceedingly narrow magical focus.
-
Oh, ok. I thought it was being suggested to take it in addition to channeling, but what you said makes a lot more sense.
-
Sorry, yes I did understand that and I take no offense. What I mean is that there is really no mechanical benefit to having more elements, thus the amount of elements doesn't really matter. People may feel different, but this is my opinion
-
If by element you mean a style of evocation based on a Classical Greek element like Fire and not an "element" of evocation. Then yeah.
-
I'm not 100% sure what you mean by your post but I think we agree
-
I think we do too.
-
Great answers all. 100 likes for Uncle Iroh...
Sponsored magic (or some variant thereof) seems like a good route for a focused caster with some additional depths.
-
If by element you mean a style of evocation based on a Classical Greek element like Fire and not an "element" of evocation. Then yeah.
Wait...do you mean that you should only ever have 5 elements? Because if so then I think we may be back to disagreeing. :P
-
Wait...do you mean that you should only ever have 5 elements? Because if so then I think we may be back to disagreeing. :P
Any given player (and/or their respective GM) should think very, very carefully before creating a character using an element paradigm containing a number of elements other (be it greater or fewer) than 5.
-
I dont feel there is any balance issue with it but I would be open to be convinced otherwise.
-
Some elements can definitely reasonably do a wider array of maneuvers (compare fire to air, earth or spirit) but for the most part, each element attacks and blocks in a fairly similar manner (mechanically). You don't need ALL the elements to do whatever you need to do.
It doesn't seem to me that someone who has Air, Fire and Spirit (But not water or earth) is weaker than someone with Air, Water and Metal (but not fire, wood or spirit) or someone with Ice, Entropy and Light (but not Cloud, Darkness, Wood, Earth, Fire, Law, Water, Spirit and Beast).
As long as whatever chosen elements from the system you believe in give you a wide enough array of reasonable effects for you to play your character effectively, it doesn't matter how many other elements you think are out there.
In the books, there are various types of evocation that people and boogin's throw out. Stylistically/mechanically, some work better as sponsored magic, but some could easily be reskinned as elements.
-
That is basically my point. Having more elements or less elements doesnt really do much because most of the time you can explain a wide variety of effects through just one element.
-
The vast majority of evocation-appropriate effects likely available through Ice, Entropy, and Cloud are available through the canon interpretation of Water. A character, then, who selects any of those former three elements is substantially less versatile than a character who instead selected the single latter element.
In fact, a character who selected EACH of the former three elements would be only slightly more versatile than a character with ONLY the single latter element.
Having more elements REALLY DOES 'do much' to affect game balance where evokers are concerned.
edit: To take this point to the extreme, so as to make it eminently clear, consider a character capable of producing all evocation effects normally available under the 'classic' canon 5-'element' paradigm from their paradigm using only ONE 'element'. Now compare that character to one for whom those effects are divided amongst one hundred, or one thousand different 'elements'.
Each of those characters purchases the Channeling power.
Which has more versatility? Versatility being itself a form of power, which has more power?
-
I dont see how. Especially if I make the five elements Ice, entropy, cloud, water, blood. They are all canon "water" but i have made them into a five element system. Its still five. Which is what you said would unbalance it. Or does the entirety of the universe in which you operate have to operate on the same five elements?
-
I think it's important to understand that your elements are just how you see the world. So if your Cloud Evocations include some of water and some of air and lightning and whatever else, that's fine. Or if your understanding of water includes order and cleansing instead of entropy. Every practitioner doesn't see every element the same way and won't use it the same way. So (in my view) many of them could be narrower or more broad in range depending on the array of effects the player could explain (and the practitioner could wrap his head around) using thatelement.
And I agree Tedronai, many of the elements I listed (off the top of my head during a lecture /shame) step on other elements' toes. And a practitioner who understood the elements through a gazillion element system and chose 3 closely related elements would likely have a narrower range than someone who chose very different elements. This would be an issue with such a system, but not much of a handicap (just fewer maneuver options) in play.
Still, I can see the attraction of choosing something like Water, Ice and Blood. You want to be a kickin' water-witch (or waterbender, lol)
In fact, I think it would probably be a good answer to my original question of how to make a specialist keep up with someone who has full-blown Evocation. (With 3 related elements, you can take multiple specializations without running into the column issue).
And yes, obviously this bit of business would not be for every player or every practitioner. If it's a mechanical limitation, I'd think it relatively mild, but crazy element systems could open up options for players who were into that sort of thing.
-
Rewording Evocation to have a more powerful focused practitioner is absolutely valid, I've proposed this a while ago, even done so with one character. It's a good way to combine the flavor of a focused practitioner with the power of a wizard.
-
Yea. I simply don't see how have 25 elements as opposed to 5 is that much of a mechanical limitation. Thematic limitation maybe, but definitely not mechanical
-
In a game of creative rationalisation, the ease of that rationalisation becomes a 'mechanical issue'.
-
Yea. I simply don't see how have 25 elements as opposed to 5 is that much of a mechanical limitation. Thematic limitation maybe, but definitely not mechanical
I don't really see broadening one element as creating an evocation system of 25 elements. If you upgrade your aquamancer to a "5 aspects of water"-evocator, he's still an aquamancer. Once you decide to give him an aspect of another element, I would fold it all into the regular evocation elements and put all his different specializations for the water aspects under one water specialization.
@Tedronai
I think the limitation here is wanted. Like I said, you are till playing an aquamancer (or a pyro, terra, whatevermancer). Splitting up the element into subelements just allows you to take evocation and buy specializations with refinement, per the usual evocation rules. Yes, it is suboptimal, but I believe that is wanted in a case like this.
-
Yes, it is suboptimal, but I believe that is wanted in a case like this.
There's a reason I said 'think carefully' rather than 'don't do it'.
Players/GMs doing this should be aware of exactly what it is that they're doing, and what it will mean for their characters. If they're OK with playing a suboptimal character, and doing so will not have an appreciable negative impact on those around them (ie. won't drag the rest of the group down with them), then more power to them.
-
There's a reason I said 'think carefully' rather than 'don't do it'.
Well, now I feel kind of silly. Apologies.
Though I don't even see the danger of such a character dragging down a group. In any conflict, he'll be pretty much as powerful as any wizard with full evocation (maybe even more, since he isn't forced to take thaumaturgy). Even being less versatile, I think, is only half true. Since you have that limitation by choice, you surely think about ways to work around some, if not all of those limitations.
And since you have full evo, I would even say that it is legitimate to have say heat effects with water (I admit, fire might be stretching it, but that's more a compel on your "aquamancer" aspect). Full evo with one element coloring the effects of the others, if you will. At least that's one way to look at it.
-
You still aren't telling me how it is sub optimal to have 25 elements as opposed to five there is no mechanical benefit from being able to do something. Most elements can do just that and I can challenge you to an effect that would be impossible to achieve with any of the five elements, given the right thematic explanation. There for if I make more elements that don't have explicit crossover, then there is no reason that the mechanical advantage would change
EDIT: even with crossover I don't think it would matter much
-
Again, I think having 25 (probably overlapping elements) would make it easier to make a character with fewer options than a full-on evocator, that is not a necessary thing or even a necessarily unwanted (if you want to make a kickin' aquamancer) thing.
But otherwise, I really don't think having 100 elements that you don't jive with is more disadvantage than having 2 for a fire/water/spirit (or whatever 3 elements) evocator.
-
Right. I'm just using 25 as a ridiculous example, but a system that used 7 elements instead of five? Not really game changing. One that used 4? Still there isn't much difference. The only thing it effects is the "new element" voice with refinement, but that doesn't break anything really
-
Determine the effects you would deem reasonable for each of the current 5 evocation elements.
Divide those same effects, with similar levels of overlap (ie. a bit, but not really all that much) among a new set of 25 elements.
Compare the number of effects available to each of the new elements to the number available to each of the current elements. Note how the former number is lower than the latter.
Or, I challenge you to apply the same principles of balance to other facets of the game mechanics, like, say, Incite Emotion.
-
Determine the effects you would deem reasonable for each of the current 5 evocation elements.
Divide those same effects, with similar levels of overlap (ie. a bit, but not really all that much) among a new set of 25 elements.
Compare the number of effects available to each of the new elements to the number available to each of the current elements. Note how the former number is lower than the latter.
Or, I challenge you to apply the same principles of balance to other facets of the game mechanics, like, say, Incite Emotion.
A) Not neccessarally. Plus you are simply assuming that I am extrapolating more elements from the 5 provided instead of comming up with new ones.
B) I dont understand the connotation for incite emotion when it covers all emotions and has been changed in the custom powers list already to incite effect which covers a lot of things, so....
-
A) Not neccessarally. Plus you are simply assuming that I am extrapolating more elements from the 5 provided instead of comming up with new ones.
If you're simply coming up with new effects to be available for evocation, or new combinations of existing effects, without diluting those already available among a wider elemental paradigm, then what you're doing is, in fact, making evocation MORE powerful.
Players and GMs should think very carefully in that case, too.
B) I dont understand the connotation for incite emotion when it covers all emotions and has been changed in the custom powers list already to incite effect which covers a lot of things, so....
Reducing the number of options to choose from without reducing the number of effects to be distributed among them would significantly increase their potency.
Increasing the number of options without increasing the number of effects to be distributed among them would significantly decrease their potency.
Adding new options for new effects significantly increases the utility of the Power, and thus it's potential potency. (Incite Effect is actually potentially quite a bit more powerful than Incite Emotion; personally, I do not see a typical usage of this increase as problematic, but players and GMs should still be careful not to abuse it)
-
If you're simply coming up with new effects to be available for evocation, or new combinations of existing effects, without diluting those already available among a wider elemental paradigm, then what you're doing is, in fact, making evocation MORE powerful.
Players and GMs should think very carefully in that case, too.
I dont think that is true. I can choose fire and come up with many different effects, some of which will cross over into other elements. The same holds true for every element of the 5 written. Changing the elements all together and going for the same 5 variety is not any different than changing it and making 6 or 4 or keeping it the same and taking some out or adding some in. I could take out spirit for instance and have Earth, Wind, Water, Fire. The ammount of available effects for my evocation hasnt changed, even if the total elements have. The same is true if I add wood to make it Earth, Wind, Water, Fire, Spirit, Wood. I can still get the same number of effects. This is my point. The element is the flavor of the effect but the effects dont really change.
EDIT: The only things you can do with evocation is Attack; Block; Armor; Maneuver ect. It doesn't matter what element you use, these are what you are doing.
-
Then you'd be fine with a character whose magical paradigm included only the single element 'magic', capable of replicating all effects available to each of the canon elements?
Or giving a character using Incite Emotion access to any and all emotions without paying a single point of extra refresh?
After all, the mechanical tools used to represent what they can do with those power are just attack, block, and maneuver.
-
Pretty much, yea. It isnt mechanic breaking. Its simply flavor. I would argue that they shouldnt do that because they would have a lot of stuff to use but I dont think it breaks the game at all Mechanically. As I have stated before it may shift things in one direction or the other thematically but the structure of the mechanics remains the same. Moreso with magic than emotion because there are radically different effects coming from different emotions than from different elements IMO
-
Tedronai: In my view, the elements already overlap. They can all attack, they can all come up with one or more blocks, and they can all do (most of) the same maneuvers.
If I wanted to add Off Balance or somesuch to a group of enemies, it could be with whipping winds or water/ice on the floor or shaking stones or spirits grasping at them from the Nevernever or anything else I could think of. It depends on the practitioner.
Harry freezes things with fire (pre Changes) because fire is his jam. Maybe you freeze things with water or gale force winds.
You could obscure an area with smoke, some sort of veil/illusion, mist, fog/condensed air or a magical sandstorm. Each of the elements has it's things it's associated with in Harry/Jim's experience, but another player/practitioner could approach them differently.
I recognize the concern that having more elements would dilute the effects associated with them, but you can already get most effects with two or more elements. Having 25 (and being able to get the same effects from five or six elements) doesn't seem like a game-breaking deal to me.
Again, this is not saying you should make your players do it. It was mostly brought up discussing how to make an elemental specialist who could advance like a Wizard. I can see players/characters who would enjoy this and players/characters who would have more fun with the 5-element system.
-
Regarding the 5 canon elements: Is Spirit somehow slightly better than the other elements?
Mechanical advantages:
-Non-lethal taken outs are easily justifiable (as opposed to, say, fire)
-Ability to deal mental stress
-More subtle, less flashy
-Veils (a special block only available to spirit)
-
Regarding the 5 canon elements: Is Spirit somehow slightly better than the other elements?
Mechanical advantages:
-Non-lethal taken outs are easily justifiable (as opposed to, say, fire)
-Ability to deal mental stress
-More subtle, less flashy
-Veils (a special block only available to spirit)
I consider non-lethal take-outs to be fairly easy to justify with nearly any weapon or element. Spirit does have a few very obvious ones, though. I seem to remember the "ability to deal mental stress" bit being controversial, as well.
In general, I'd say yes, Spirit element is best element. If I were on the DM side of things, though, I'd probably try to be more generous to the other elements in terms of overlapping effects and more stringent as to what Spirit-based rationalizations I'd allow (and say so up front). I'd also permit Veil-like blocks in other elements (sandstorm, mist, etc.--local conditions will determine what will work best, I think), though a standard Spirit Veil will still have the advantage of always being justified and straightforward.