The problem with Thaumaturgy (house rules review request)

[Arcane257]

I have been rereading the books lately, and I realized that I just don't feel like the rules as written represent the danger of Thaumaturgy as its presented in the books. I mean I realize Dresden is supposed to be more of a brawler type, but even Bob (who has been working with wizards for over 1k years or so) makes it pretty clear that more powerful rituals have a real risk of causing harm.

The problem I have is once you get your bonus up +5 rituals never go wrong for the caster unless they get interrupted. I was thinking that maybe a way to counter this would be to introduce penalty to each roll based off the total complexity of the ritual being attempted. For example -1 per 10 or 5 points of complexity. 

I was also thinking that maybe it would mean that I would have to set a base time per roll, and allow people to speed it up at increased risk or slow it down for less risk. Also I was thinking that declarations could now be used not only to meet complexity higher than Lore + modifiers rating, but also to help reduce the penalty some. (the -1 per 5 makes more sense to me if I add this stuff in)

For example under this system when Harry wanted to use Little Chicago to search for black magic Little Chicago was used to do something more complex than his lore skill would allow and his purification efforts were done to reduce the penalty to each roll.

I was also thinking this would set the stage for me figuring out rules to build more concrete rules for permanent props used to boost ritual magic. The idea being to give mechanics for things like Little Chicago, Dresden's ever improving quality on his floor ring, and such beyond just being a declaration.
(this is still very much a work in progress and I am not sure how I would handle it but I was thinking it would be that permanent props could serve to help meet complexity totals for appropriate spells ie you would have your lore, focus items, + props to determine base number before you start making declarations)

This all very much in flux but I know we have some great minds on this board so I figured I would ask for peoples thoughts on it.

[Mrmdubois]

Thaumaturgy is safe, that's why people use it.  Put pressure on Casters with time constraints and compels.  Danger problem solved.

Also, Little Chicago was probably a plot device.

Permanent props are Focus Items specifically for Thaumaturgy.

[Arcane257]

I think its clear that Thaum is safe within certain limits. As the system is currently written starting players can put together some pretty game breaking rituals with no fear of failure, which I think clearly contradicts what the books presents.

Thanks for your thoughts though

[InFerrumVeritas]

I agree.  The "fix" I was working on a while back involved putting a limit on the number of rounds a character has to control a ritual.  I never got it quite right. 

[UmbraLux]

One potential fix is simply requiring a minimum threshold of power control per exchange based on the number of shifts in the ritual.  Make your control threshold the square root of total shifts of power (rounded down) and larger rituals become dangerous.  A 4 to 8 shift ritual would require controlling 2 power per exchange, 9 shifts require 3, 16 shifts need 4, 25 need 5, etc. 

It would put a soft cap on ritual power and drive larger rituals towards group celebrants.  Not a bad thing in my opinion.

[Addicted2aa]

Thaumaturgy is safe, that's why people use it.  Put pressure on Casters with time constraints and compels.  Danger problem solved.

Also, Little Chicago was probably a plot device.

Permanent props are Focus Items specifically for Thaumaturgy.

I agree. Most of the time you want Thaumaturgy to be... Not exactly easy, but there shouldn't really be much risk. When doing powerful or plot altering spells, then you want to up the tension, but otherwise, it's more just a bit of flavor saying, here's how I got from Point A to Point B

[Mr. Death]

Yeah, most of the time, I end up just letting my players go ahead and get away with a spell that's 6-shifts or under. For the most part it's one declaration needed to cast, and the worst thing that's going to happen to them on a blown roll is a mild consequence.

For bigger spells (10-12 shifts thus far), I'll usually have a couple of the declarations be a gimme with some time cost, and one or two involve a big of sidequesting (in the last game, one spell involved going to the south west US to capture lightning with a bounty hunter on the way, and another had a character having to sneak into her work to talk her boss into lending her a component). I tend to make them roll out the casting for those spells as well, since there's a real chance of significant consequences if they blow it, and I started a battle right in the beginning of another casting for the tension.

But yeah, generally Thaumaturgy's supposed to be the "safe" kind of casting.

[Sanctaphrax]

I was thinking that maybe a way to counter this would be to introduce penalty to each roll based off the total complexity of the ritual being attempted. For example -1 per 10 or 5 points of complexity. 

I remember proposing something like this a long time ago, though my idea used base complexity in place of a fixed number.

IIRC, I got shot down pretty badly. Getting to Control 5 is actually sort of difficult for many casters, so Thaumaturgy is actually crazy dangerous for a lot of people. Making it more so is not necessarily a good idea.

Recently, I've been thinking you could fix that by setting the baseline higher. Like, you get +1 control for spells within your base complexity, +0 up to base x2, -1 up to base x3, -2 up to base x4, and so on. Or something like that.

Here, this link might be handy:

http://www.jimbutcheronline.com/bb/index.php/topic,32637.0.html

[Arcane257]

Thanks for the link. It's helped a lot.

[Sanctaphrax]

You're very welcome.