I'm quite sure Harry explicitly mentions some wizards getting incredibly wealthy using their powers. I thing he does so fairly at the end of Proven Guilty when talking to Molly about her future (can be wrong though). That said, I don't see where this no riches through magic thing is coming from.

I'm only going by Ryan_Singer's response early in this thread, and Becq's agreement with him.  But, like I said, thematically I like the idea that wealth is hard to come by, even for a wizard.

To be clear, though, I'm not as interested in the rules for getting rich via Transformation (although it is a cool discussion).  I'm mainly interested in setting guidelines for "everyday" Transformation.  i.e. "What could you use it for during a game?" or "What could you do for six-ten shifts of complexity?"

• Want to sneak some secret documents out of a building, but they'll search your bag when you leave?  Transform them into a Pulp Mystery novel.
• Need an antidote to Black Widow venom, but you don't have a lab nearby?  Transform some nearby flowers (assuming you know what the antidote is).
• Need to make a good impression?  Temporarily transform your "Cheap Clothes" into a "Stlylish Suit".
• Being chased by a werewolf?  Transform your silver earrings and your knife into a Silver-coated Dagger.
• Timmy trapped down a well?  Transform the smooth walls into a ladder.

I feel like there are lots of good uses for Transformation magic (that isn't Law-breaking) but not enough guidelines for its complexity.  So I'm hoping to develop a simple set of rules.  If those rules can cover basic transformation and alchemy, awesome.  If it also covers transforming living creatures (willing or unwilling), then that's even better!

True enough, but is not Dresden doing that every time he calls Fire? or Air? or Earth?  50 seems absurd to me.

What?  No, I don't believe Harry is changing atomic structures when he casts spells.  Fire isn't an element, for one.  And Earth, Air, and Water are basically everywhere, so they're not being created out of nothing.  But I would allow evocation to turn oxygen into helium (although maybe it could collect and filter out the small amounts of helium in the air...) or copper into cold iron.

50 shifts is still a pretty huge amount.  It's based on the idea proposed earlier that "you can't use magic to get rich", so I wanted to suggest a game mechanic to explain that.  But "add 5 shifts per kg" was an arbitrary choice.  Maybe it should be something like "add 2 shifts per kg", and therefore only add 20 shifts, or "add 5 shifts per 10 kg", and therefore only add 5 shifts.  Or maybe the proposed rule #3 needs to be scrapped entirely.  I'm definitely open to suggestions!

That being said, permanent transformation requires enough shifts to use up all consequence slots and *then* to take out the object.  Assuming something simple with a minor consequence and a moderate, and 3 stress, that's 9 shifts required to transform it period. More depending on it's defense if it gets any.  Now take into account that you may not actually get proper "gold" for the lead to gold example, you'd require at the minimum of 4-5 shifts just to add to complexity, maybe more depending (this is taken from the conjuration section, but should apply here as well).  At this point, that's approx 15 shifts you'll need.  Lets just say that you add 4-5 more to chalk up to added complexity, and vastly different material.  That's approx 20 shifts. Oh, and don't forget, you'd probably actually have to have some real gold for the ritual to even work, so that's some resources you'll be tapping into. At this point, wouldn't you be better off just summoning some gold or stealing it from a bank/jewelry store?

Also, I wouldn't say that craftsmanship is required here, as it really isn't for conjuration either. However, I'd be inclined to say that the complexity is limited by your craftsmanship/scholarship, depending on the object. Meaning that if you don't understand the fundamentals of the desired object, you're not going to be able to transform it properly.

Well, the guidelines I proposed are based on the idea that normal objects, in general, can't take consequences, since they can't heal themselves.  What would be a mild, moderate, or severe consequence for a bar of lead?  It was also based on the idea that simple transformations should be possible (i.e. transforming a rock into a stone chair, transforming a knife into a lock pick, etc.)  If every transformation spell starts at a baseline of 9 shifts of complexity, plus several more shifts depending on complexity, then transformation is almost never going to be a useful theme in the game.

Don't misunderstand - I think the argument you gave for this specific spell is completely reasonable.  The result certainly "feels" about right.  But I'm interested in a simple set of guidelines to follow for any Transformation ritual, and I'm not sure I could apply your reasoning to other spells and come up with a satisfying result.

Let me see if I can give a first draft of the guidelines we're talking about:

Transformative Thaumaturgy:

1a) If you want to permanently transform something, the baseline complexity is equal to the number of shifts required to "take it out"

• For PCs and NPCs, this is equal to their physical stress boxes, plus available consequences, plus 1.
• For objects, this is equal to their physical stress boxes.  Particularly complex objects might require extra shifts (essentially, "armor" against Transformation).  Magical objects might be able to take consequences as well.

1b) If you only want to temporarily transform something, the baseline complexity is equal to the length of time the object will remain transformed.  Zero shifts is equal to 1 exchange.

2) In addition to the baseline complexity, add the difficulty required to manually transform the initial object into the desired object, assuming such a thing were possible.  This is considered the combination of multiple skill rolls, determined by the GM.

• Changing stone into a specific shape could be a Fair (+2) Craftsmanship task.
• Changing a human into a (same-size) animal could be a Great (+4) Scholarship task, plus a Good (+3) Craftsmanship task.

3) If the initial object requires different material, more mass, or less mass than the desired object, add +6 (maybe?) shifts for every kilogram of difference.  This represents the difficulty to create or destroy the desired material.
3b) For temporary transformation, add 3 shifts for every kilogram of difference.  This represents the difficulty to conjure or "hide" the desired material.

Some examples:

• Temporarily creating an opening in a wall = 3 complexity: 0 (1 exchange) + 3 (Craftsmanship)
• Permanently repairing a hole in the roof (with lumber available) = 7 complexity: 4 (physical stress + 1) + 3 (Craftsmanship)
• Tranforming a bar of Lead into Gold = 54 complexity: 3 (physical stress +1) + 1 (Craftsmanship) + 50 (converting 10 kg of Lead into 10 kg of Gold)

How does that sound?

Unless, of course, destruction is your intention, in which case you really are trying to 'take out' the object.  For example, if you wanted to get into the castle, and decided to turn a section of the wall into a flowerbed so that you could stroll in, then you really are trying to take out the wall, not do a bit of gardening.

Hmmm... I'm not sure I agree.  I'm away from the books, but the section on Transformation mentions that most objects don't "want" to be changed.  I would say that, from the object's perspective, it doesn't make any difference whether you're transforming it for Gardening or for Infiltration.  Either way, you're still "destroying" the original object, right?

On the other hand, I do agree that you need to factor in the difference between starting and ending objects somehow.  That would also explain why it's so difficult/expensive to transform Lead into Gold.  Transforming Lead into a different shape can be done relatively quickly.  Transforming each molecule of Lead into a molecule of Gold would take significantly longer.  You could still do it, but it would take months to prepare the spell, (and then another month to power it).

I think a good question to ask might be why? This would all be thaumaturgy and I wouldn't think any of it would be quick. If it takes you the entire combat (potentially longer if you need preparation) to transform a pen into a sword then that's not going to be much use. And it would be much faster to stack a bunch of furniture against a door than it would be to make the door disappear.

That's a valid question.

The scenario that got me thinking about this was "How do you stop a building from collapsing using magic?"  In my current character's backstory, he abandoned his friends (who were battling a minotaur) in order to save a building full of people (that had been damaged during the fight).

- Evocation (Earth) could provide a temporary "Hold Up The Walls" Aspect for a few exchanges, possibly just long enough to cast a simple Conjuration ritual.
- Thaumaturgy (Conjuration) could create longer lasting support beams, but they wouldn't last forever.  Still, it would give you enough breathing room to repair the damage with a Transformation ritual.
- Thaumaturgy (Transformation) could repair the building, leaving the occupants to believe that it was all just a minor earthquake or something.

A possibly better solution would be to use the "Solve improbable or impossible problems" clause of Thaumaturgy.  So basically, you ask yourself "if it was even possible to re-chef a burger into a steak, how would it work?"  I'd figure out what skill level you'd need to make the item (which might also be determined by your desired quality, but probably defaults to around 2 for baseline quality), then figure out how long it would take for a craftsman to do the work.  Then reduce the ritual time to a reasonable amount by adding complexity (see the time chart).
...
Does this look about right?

I like it as a set of guidelines.  My only issue is that it seems to focus only on the finished product, and ignores any similarity to the starting object.  

Intuitively, I would assume that transforming a big rock into a stone wall is less complex than transforming, say, a tub of pudding into a stone wall.  I also wonder if a burned-down house retains any "memory" of its original form, which would therefore make it easier to restore it.  On the other hand, maybe those would just be considered Aspects to tag during the Preparation phase of Thaumaturgy?

Transforming people violates the Laws of Magic, but transforming objects is considered acceptable.  However I couldn't find any guidelines for the complexity of permanently transforming an object.

To give some specifics, what would be the complexity to...

1) Transform a fast food burger into a steak dinner?
2) Transform a knife into a sword?
3) Transform a pen into a knife?
4) Transform a wall with a door into a solid wall (with no door)?
5) Transform a house that burned down to its original condition?