Sponsor Debt for Temporary Powers?

[Deadmanwalking]

The marginalia imply it without directly stating it, in contradiction of the rules given earlier in the book. That's hardly ironclad.

They literally didn't have space to make it clearer.

Nope.

In order for the author's word to have any effect on the meaning of the rules, it would have to hold some special weight. Which it does not.

Look, we aren't mind readers and we can't be expected to track down the author's intentions when the rules are vague. So intention is best ignored. If the rules are unclear, acknowledge that and play with the interpretation that makes for the best game.

Well, yes. Obviously. You always go with whatever makes the best game regardless of any rules...but if you're doing so in knowing contradiction of the author's stated intent (especially state right when the words were written) you're making a house rule and claims that you aren't are shaky at best. Now, doing house rules is hardly a problem...but it's very much what's going on when you make interpretations you know for a fact aren't what the authors intended.

I mean, if an author says "I might've done it this way..." years later or something that's pretty meaningless, rules-wise, though it might be good advice. If you're talking to them as they're writing something into the book and they explicitly say what they mean...that's pretty damn compelling. Or should be anyway. and precisely the situation we're talking about here.

The problems are that a) there's no real agreement on how long things should take dramatically speaking and b) the vagueness basically forces you to play freeform when doing big rituals. And freeform play makes all of those (mostly very good) Thaumaturgy rules totally pointless because you're barely using them, while ruining the whole powergaming experience.

I honestly think if you're looking for a powergaming experience, the DFRPG (and especially the Thaumaturgy rules) are not made with your sensibilities or goals in mind. And you're definitely using them, indeed, you're using them for their intended purpose: If your GM isn't regarding any spell as a story that he can either interject things to interrupt or interject coolthings into the game with, he's not using the system as intended.

And three or four Declarations in five minutes doesn't actually break much. At least, my experience indicates that it does't actually break much. It's powerful, but not ridiculously so.

And yes, my players are creative with Thaumaturgy.

(Recovery abuse is pretty broken, though.)

It's the 'while doing nothing but thinking' that makes me really dubious, you at least need to make a circle and have an ingredient or two. But yeah, I don't actually have a problem with quick Thaumaturgy...but 3 refresh of powers aren't generally too awful anyway. It's if you keep allowing the player to do so over successive five minute periods it gets really problematic.

I wouldn't let people do them all with the same skill, but a five minute ritual with +6 complexity from Declarations is generally okay with me. Allowing that just means that people will use Thaumaturgy frequently and in a variety of ways.

Again, I don't actually have a problem with this, though I usually minimize time at more like 15 minutes than 5. It's when they get much bigger that they start taking more and more time, progressing in a geometric fashion, not a linear one.

Now, people do indeed take rituals a bit for granted when you let them do them fast. That's okay, they spent Refresh on them. It doesn't damage the game if they divine the murderer's name or summon up a flying chariot to cross a chasm.

But if they give themselves Inhuman Recovery all the bloody time then it does damage the game. So you can't let people take power-granting for granted.

Eh. They could have it all the time for a point of Refresh anyway (indeed, I think 5/6 of my last group did). I'm really not seeing a problem with getting it cheaply without FP. Hell, Reiki Healing already does that sans FP at only Complexity 8-10, except for the in-combat use, which they're almost never gonna get unless prepping for a fight. And even then, if they have prep-time, Inhuman Recovery is hardly their best choice, is it?

[Sanctaphrax]

They literally didn't have space to make it clearer.

Wrong.

So wrong, in fact, that I suspect I'm misunderstanding you somehow.

Look at the Temporary Powers box. Do you really think they couldn't fit the words "or tags" in there? Because they could have. There's more than enough space for six letters and two spaces.

Did you really mean that they couldn't fit those words in the box on page 92?

Well, yes. Obviously. You always go with whatever makes the best game regardless of any rules...but if you're doing so in knowing contradiction of the author's stated intent (especially state right when the words were written) you're making a house rule and claims that you aren't are shaky at best. Now, doing house rules is hardly a problem...but it's very much what's going on when you make interpretations you know for a fact aren't what the authors intended.

I feel like you're not actually reading my posts...

Intent doesn't matter to me. What's written does. A house rule is a rule that contradicts the rules as written, not a rule that contradicts the rules as intended.

I honestly think if you're looking for a powergaming experience, the DFRPG (and especially the Thaumaturgy rules) are not made with your sensibilities or goals in mind.

Of all the systems I'm familiar with, it accommodates powergaming the best.

D&D 3.5, Exalted, Scion, and Shadowrun all implode (more than they do normally) if you try to powergame. Unknown Armies, Don't Rest Your Head, and Nobilis provide little reward for optimization. Alpha Omega is just kind of meh mechanically. Mongoose Legend's randomness makes powergaming kinda futile, and Rule Of Cool Legend is not finished yet.

I don't know what Evil Hat intended, but I doubt they were unaware of the way that Compels bring optimal play into line with interesting play. And they probably didn't provide a wide selection of mostly-but-not-completely balanced abilities by accident.

It's the 'while doing nothing but thinking' that makes me really dubious, you at least need to make a circle and have an ingredient or two. But yeah, I don't actually have a problem with quick Thaumaturgy...but 3 refresh of powers aren't generally too awful anyway. It's if you keep allowing the player to do so over successive five minute periods it gets really problematic.

Why would I not let them do it repeatedly?

It's when they get much bigger that they start taking more and more time, progressing in a geometric fashion, not a linear one.

It'd be nice if this was true.

Because the way it is now, the group has to make it true. And if they have differing ideas about how Thaumaturgy works, that's a massive pain.

In my experience, people disagree about what's possible with rituals all the time. This is rather problematic when somebody actually wants to cast one and people waste time talking about the rules instead of using them.

The above bit about "repeated-ness" is a good example. If we were actually playing I might try to conjure a dozen things one by one. This seems to me to be within the rules as written and the rules as intended. But if you were at the table, the game might need to be derailed by a tedious discussion about whether I can actually do that.

Eh. They could have it all the time for a point of Refresh anyway (indeed, I think 5/6 of my last group did). I'm really not seeing a problem with getting it cheaply without FP. Hell, Reiki Healing already does that sans FP at only Complexity 8-10, except for the in-combat use, which they're almost never gonna get unless prepping for a fight. And even then, if they have prep-time, Inhuman Recovery is hardly their best choice, is it?

Inhuman Recovery is much better than Reiki Healing. And if you don't think it's the best available, pick something else...it's just an example.

[Deadmanwalking]

Wrong.

So wrong, in fact, that I suspect I'm misunderstanding you somehow.

Look at the Temporary Powers box. Do you really think they couldn't fit the words "or tags" in there? Because they could have. There's more than enough space for six letters and two spaces.

Did you really mean that they couldn't fit those words in the box on page 92?

No, I meant they didn't have space on p. 283. By default, RAW and RAI, without Thaumaturgy, you cannot pay the cost with Tags...and thus p. 92 is not the place for this. P. 283, where they discuss how Thaumaturgy rules interact with those rules is, in fact, the perfect place...but they only had room for a few more words...so they put them in, but not with as much clarity as would be ideal.

I feel like you're not actually reading my posts...

Intent doesn't matter to me. What's written does. A house rule is a rule that contradicts the rules as written, not a rule that contradicts the rules as intended.

I actually agree with you for the most part. Except when the rules-as-written are open to multiple valid interpretations (as here)...in which case, the author saying what they meant makes all the difference in the world and leads to an obviously correct interpretation.

Of all the systems I'm familiar with, it accommodates powergaming the best.

D&D 3.5, Exalted, Scion, and Shadowrun all implode (more than they do normally) if you try to powergame. Unknown Armies, Don't Rest Your Head, and Nobilis provide little reward for optimization. Alpha Omega is just kind of meh mechanically. Mongoose Legend's randomness makes powergaming kinda futile, and Rule Of Cool Legend is not finished yet.

I don't know what Evil Hat intended, but I doubt they were unaware of the way that Compels bring optimal play into line with interesting play. And they probably didn't provide a wide selection of mostly-but-not-completely balanced abilities by accident.

Oh, bringing optimal play in-line with interesting play was a design goal...powergaming per se was not. The fact that powergaming doesn't break the system just shows that it's a well-designed system...not that its intent is to enable such things. And the 'unequal' powers are a necessary artifact of the world it's intended to represent. A DFRPG game where humans could do as much damage in unarmed combat as Ogres would seriously fly in the face of the world it's intended to simulate...so some dgree of inequality is inevitable.

Why would I not let them do it repeatedly?

It's boring and fails to tell a story? I mean, there's an entire sidebar talking about the story of the spell, and the game as a whole is more based on thematics than strict adherence to the mechanics per se. But if your group likes doing things that way...then do so. That's the point of leaving those rules unstated, really. So each group can choose the manner of spell preparation that appeals most to them, and proceed to only spend as much time on said rules as they like, both in-story and out.

It'd be nice if this was true.

Because the way it is now, the group has to make it true. And if they have differing ideas about how Thaumaturgy works, that's a massive pain.

In my experience, people disagree about what's possible with rituals all the time. This is rather problematic when somebody actually wants to cast one and people waste time talking about the rules instead of using them.

The above bit about "repeated-ness" is a good example. If we were actually playing I might try to conjure a dozen things one by one. This seems to me to be within the rules as written and the rules as intended. But if you were at the table, the game might need to be derailed by a tedious discussion about whether I can actually do that.

Not if the GM's on the ball. Their ruling's the one that counts and everyone should abide by that after one argument at the most. So one discussion per game (not session, but game)...not too bad a price to pay for flexibility in how much time the group wants to spend on Thaumaturgy and in what manner.

If things get argued more than that, well, I'm inclined to think there would've been arguments about something anyway. There's always some point of disagreement to be had in any game. Always.

Inhuman Recovery is much better than Reiki Healing. And if you don't think it's the best available, pick something else...it's just an example.

How's having it for one non-combat scene better than a Reiki Healing spell or two? It speeds up Consequence healing the same amount and is about an equivalent ritual.

And what else should I use? I'm having a hard time coming up with much that'll really break things.

[Sanctaphrax]

No, I meant they didn't have space on p. 283. By default, RAW and RAI, without Thaumaturgy, you cannot pay the cost with Tags...and thus p. 92 is not the place for this. P. 283, where they discuss how Thaumaturgy rules interact with those rules is, in fact, the perfect place...but they only had room for a few more words...so they put them in, but not with as much clarity as would be ideal.

Wait, you're saying that the Thaumaturgy temporary Power rules are different from the normal ones? Sounds weird...I don't see much reason to assume that that's the case.

And given how over-written YS is, I'm pretty certain they could have found room.

I actually agree with you for the most part. Except when the rules-as-written are open to multiple valid interpretations (as here)...in which case, the author saying what they meant makes all the difference in the world and leads to an obviously correct interpretation.

If the rules are vague then they are vague. The correct interpretation is "they're vague", not "search the net for a developer comment".

Oh, bringing optimal play in-line with interesting play was a design goal...powergaming per se was not. The fact that powergaming doesn't break the system just shows that it's a well-designed system...not that its intent is to enable such things. And the 'unequal' powers are a necessary artifact of the world it's intended to represent. A DFRPG game where humans could do as much damage in unarmed combat as Ogres would seriously fly in the face of the world it's intended to simulate...so some dgree of inequality is inevitable.

Just out of curiosity, what do you use the word "powergaming" to mean?

Also, humans can do as much damage as ogres in unarmed combat.

It's boring and fails to tell a story?

Doesn't have to be boring.

And any sequence of events is a story.

Not if the GM's on the ball. Their ruling's the one that counts and everyone should abide by that after one argument at the most. So one discussion per game (not session, but game)...not too bad a price to pay for flexibility in how much time the group wants to spend on Thaumaturgy and in what manner.

If things get argued more than that, well, I'm inclined to think there would've been arguments about something anyway. There's always some point of disagreement to be had in any game. Always.

There's a lot more than one point of vagueness in the rules. Believe me, it's not just one argument.

The rules for Thaumaturgy promote confusion and disagreement. Because they clearly assume that people have some kind of unspoken awareness of what everyone else thinks is acceptable. And that's not always so.

If you're supposed to decide on the limits of Thaumaturgy as a group, the rules should say something about doing that during city/character creation. But they don't.

And having the GM impose dictatorial control is not a good thing at all. I can say as a GM, it's not fun.

How's having it for one non-combat scene better than a Reiki Healing spell or two? It speeds up Consequence healing the same amount and is about an equivalent ritual.

And what else should I use? I'm having a hard time coming up with much that'll really break things.

It affects all consequences, not just a single moderate, and is handy if a fight starts.

Plus you don't have it for one scene, you have it for all of them. Just cast the ritual again.

Wizards are, in-story, munchkins. They can be expected to acquire whatever unfair magical advantages they can.

Wings is probably the most broken thing to make easily available with magic. Beast Change is pretty unfair too. But honestly a few extra points of Refresh for free will pretty much always break things. You don't even have to spend it intelligently.

[Deadmanwalking]

Wait, you're saying that the Thaumaturgy temporary Power rules are different from the normal ones? Sounds weird...I don't see much reason to assume that that's the case.

And given how over-written YS is, I'm pretty certain they could have found room.

Uh...at the stage they were at, they only had the marginalia to work with. I mean, I'm directly quoting Fred here on the 'no room' thing...I mean, read the thread I linked. He mentioned the paying with Tags thing, I suggested putting it in the book, he responded with "Sadly, there's almost no room." and then found room, but only for a few words...which are thus less clear than would be ideal.

Are you saying that one of the authors of the game was lying or mistaken there...or what? Because I'm legitimately unclear. I mean, he directly said there wasn't room, what more do you want?

If the rules are vague then they are vague. The correct interpretation is "they're vague", not "search the net for a developer comment".

Well, yeah. And then that interpretation changes to "Oh, that's what he meant." if you do happen to run into such a statement. Because, y'know, the actual author's intent has some relevance if you happen to know what it was at the time.

Just out of curiosity, what do you use the word "powergaming" to mean?

In context? Attempting to make the most mechanically optimal character possible, preferably one with no weaknesses whatsoever and being as unstoppable as possible in whatever area you focus on. Not usually a good primary goal in any game (though fine as a secondary goal) and just generally not what this specific system was designed for.

Also, humans can do as much damage as ogres in unarmed combat.

Not at equal levels of skill, no. Well, not without vast amounts of luck/FP anyway.

Doesn't have to be boring.

No, but it sure sounds it in most cases compared to more active casting.

And any sequence of events is a story.

Yes, but not necessarily a very good one or one that makes narrative sense.

There's a lot more than one point of vagueness in the rules. Believe me, it's not just one argument.

Well, sure. I meant one argument on that specific subject.

The rules for Thaumaturgy promote confusion and disagreement. Because they clearly assume that people have some kind of unspoken awareness of what everyone else thinks is acceptable. And that's not always so.

If you're supposed to decide on the limits of Thaumaturgy as a group, the rules should say something about doing that during city/character creation. But they don't.

Um...game writers aren't perfect and don't think of everything? I mean, sure, that'd be nice and clearly a good idea, but it's not hard to work around.

And if you're really playing with a group who can't work this sort of thing out in some sort of amicable fashion...that sounds like there's a problem there that has nothing to do with the game.

And having the GM impose dictatorial control is not a good thing at all. I can say as a GM, it's not fun.

Saying "That's my ruling and it's final." to stop an argument after you've heard out both sides isn't dictatorial control, it's a GM's job. And it's only unfun if there are things like emotional issues involved...which there really shouldn't be if you're being fair.

It affects all consequences, not just a single moderate, and is handy if a fight starts.

Eh. It doesn't help with Severe Consequences (since it's only one scene) and Mild Consequences only take a scene to heal anyway. So the difference is primarily academic if it's used in a non-combat scene.

Plus you don't have it for one scene, you have it for all of them. Just cast the ritual again.

Effectively 9-14 Shift Rituals are hard to do every scene.

Wizards are, in-story, munchkins. They can be expected to acquire whatever unfair magical advantages they can.

Of course. Any they have, y'know, time to do. Wizards tend to win given unlimited time, you need to rush them for them to have real problems. Luckily, this neatly matches how the novels go. Yay genre emulation. 

Wings is probably the most broken thing to make easily available with magic. Beast Change is pretty unfair too. But honestly a few extra points of Refresh for free will pretty much always break things. You don't even have to spend it intelligently.

Flying is cool, but hardly unstoppable. And Beast Change is only a problem if you let them grab it and get whatever skills they like...and even then, they'd almost certainly be better just sticking with Evocation

And it's hardly at-will, which is sorta my point. It's if given prep-time. Prep-time is always good. Indeed, with navel gazing Aspects it's one Aspect per exchange good...which might well be better than that time expended on a ritual.

[Sanctaphrax]

Are you saying that one of the authors of the game was lying or mistaken there...or what? Because I'm legitimately unclear. I mean, he directly said there wasn't room, what more do you want?

I'm no mind reader, but I've read that note and it contains unnecessary words. Room could have been made.

My guess is that Fred didn't much care about that detail and so put little effort into making room for it.

Because, y'know, the actual author's intent has some relevance if you happen to know what it was at the time.

Given that I've spent the entire thread saying the exact opposite of this, I'm actually pretty surprised that you'd just drop this comment in there like that.

So my response is:

no.

In context? Attempting to make the most mechanically optimal character possible, preferably one with no weaknesses whatsoever and being as unstoppable as possible in whatever area you focus on. Not usually a good primary goal in any game (though fine as a secondary goal) and just generally not what this specific system was designed for.

I use a slightly wider definition, which includes attempting to play your character in the most optimal manner possible. That is, in the manner most likely to accomplish your character's goals.

One of the best points of this game is that it doesn't often make you choose between the smart play and the narratively appropriate one.

That's what I mean when I say it's powergaming-friendly. It remains fun if people try to "win" when they play. I'd even say it gets more fun, but that's my personal taste.

This is kind of special because a lot of games just stop being fun if people make a serious attempt at "winning". D&D 3.5, for instance, devolves into uber-complex builds and 15-minute adventuring days.

Not at equal levels of skill, no. Well, not without vast amounts of luck/FP anyway.

Who said anything about equal skill?

No, but it sure sounds it in most cases compared to more active casting.

...

Yes, but not necessarily a very good one or one that makes narrative sense.

My experience is that if you just gloss over low-complexity rituals the game works nicely and produces good stories. "I take five minutes and conjure a sword" is best answered with "okay, you have a sword".

Unfortunately that style of play won't hold up under the rules you propose.

Well, sure. I meant one argument on that specific subject.

Each ritual can be its own subject, though.

Um...game writers aren't perfect and don't think of everything? I mean, sure, that'd be nice and clearly a good idea, but it's not hard to work around.

It actually kind of is hard to work around.

Look, this is a problem that people have. You can't argue away the fact that it's happened to me and to others.

And if you're really playing with a group who can't work this sort of thing out in some sort of amicable fashion...that sounds like there's a problem there that has nothing to do with the game.

...

Saying "That's my ruling and it's final." to stop an argument after you've heard out both sides isn't dictatorial control, it's a GM's job. And it's only unfun if there are things like emotional issues involved...which there really shouldn't be if you're being fair.

It's your job and it's dictatorial.

Look, arguing with your friends isn't fun. Neither is passing judgement. This (probably) isn't going to ruin a friendship, but it makes the game less pleasant to play.

Eh. It doesn't help with Severe Consequences (since it's only one scene) and Mild Consequences only take a scene to heal anyway. So the difference is primarily academic if it's used in a non-combat scene.

The interaction with Severe consequences is unclear, especially if you give yourself Recovery repeatedly.

Effectively 9-14 Shift Rituals are hard to do every scene.

Are they?

I tend to assume so, but I've heard it seriously said that 30 shifts is pretty easy. And not by someone stupid.

Of course. Any they have, y'know, time to do. Wizards tend to win given unlimited time, you need to rush them for them to have real problems. Luckily, this neatly matches how the novels go. Yay genre emulation. 

So I guess Harry's an idiot for not having access to Wings at all times. I mean, he had time in most of his casefiles for a quick ritual here and there.

Oh, and if I don't play at a breakneck pace I'm doing it wrong. So it's just my problem if things break.

Flying is cool, but hardly unstoppable. And Beast Change is only a problem if you let them grab it and get whatever skills they like...and even then, they'd almost certainly be better just sticking with Evocation

Doesn't have to be unstoppable to be unfair.

And why wouldn't people be able to pick whatever skills they want?

Oh, and Beast Change is mostly great for perception and mobility.

And it's hardly at-will, which is sorta my point. It's if given prep-time. Prep-time is always good. Indeed, with navel gazing Aspects it's one Aspect per exchange good...which might well be better than that time expended on a ritual.

Prep time is good, but if giving a Wizard a few minutes of it immediately gives everybody a bunch of Powers the game gets pretty wonky.

Tags don't last long enough to break anything normally. You have to use them "almost immediately".

[Deadmanwalking]

I'm no mind reader, but I've read that note and it contains unnecessary words. Room could have been made.

My guess is that Fred didn't much care about that detail and so put little effort into making room for it.

Where on p. 283? Because I'm not seeing it, to be honest.

Given that I've spent the entire thread saying the exact opposite of this, I'm actually pretty surprised that you'd just drop this comment in there like that.

So my response is:

no.

And this is a large part of our disagreement here. I wasn't attempting to convince you there, just stating the reason for my own point of view.

I use a slightly wider definition, which includes attempting to play your character in the most optimal manner possible. That is, in the manner most likely to accomplish your character's goals.

One of the best points of this game is that it doesn't often make you choose between the smart play and the narratively appropriate one.

That's what I mean when I say it's powergaming-friendly. It remains fun if people try to "win" when they play. I'd even say it gets more fun, but that's my personal taste.

This is kind of special because a lot of games just stop being fun if people make a serious attempt at "winning". D&D 3.5, for instance, devolves into uber-complex builds and 15-minute adventuring days.

That is indeed a strength of the game for the most part. Doesn't mean it was designed with people who do this at the expense of other things explicitly in mind, it means it was designed so that they wouldn't damage the fun of or be vastly more powerful than people who put the story first.

Who said anything about equal skill?

Well, obviously a skilled enough human can beat an Ogre, that wasn't the point of my original statement. It was that you take a human and an ogre with identical stats aside from creature type, the Ogre's gonna be stronger and deal more damage...and that that's necessary in order to properly represent the world in question.

My experience is that if you just gloss over low-complexity rituals the game works nicely and produces good stories. "I take five minutes and conjure a sword" is best answered with "okay, you have a sword".

Unfortunately that style of play won't hold up under the rules you propose.

I'm actually cool with that. It's only bigger rituals (and I'd term anything with big effects such as temporary powers as big) that I'd require a story for (though I'd make it 15 minutes on that sword, not 5).

Each ritual can be its own subject, though.

Not if you work out a definitive ruling the first time. Something I'd strongly advise for this kind of thing.

It actually kind of is hard to work around.

Look, this is a problem that people have. You can't argue away the fact that it's happened to me and to others.

That's true and fair. And a potential issue with the system, but I'm not really arguing it's not, I'm trying to explain why it was done that way and explain how to work around the problem. I've always found problems much easier to work around when you minimize them. In the grand scheme of things, this is a very little problem, and one solvable with a few basic agreements among a gaming group.

It's your job and it's dictatorial.

Look, arguing with your friends isn't fun. Neither is passing judgement. This (probably) isn't going to ruin a friendship, but it makes the game less pleasant to play.

I've never in my life had issues with any of this. Indeed, most friend-groups I've had usually enjoy a good argument. And every good GM I've ever had hasn't had any issues with laying down the law when necessary. I'm willing to believe that's not a universal experience, but still it seems to be something worth striving for. And a problem that has nothing at all to do with whatever system you're using. No system's perfect, so they'll all have these issues, and coping strategies are a necessary thing for all of them.

Or in other words: These are legit problems...but they're problems with gaming (or doing so in some groups) not with the DFRPG per se.

The interaction with Severe consequences is unclear, especially if you give yourself Recovery repeatedly.

True enough. Of course, Reiki can heal that as well with a tad bit more effort. And can be used on others without violating the 2nd Law.

Are they?

In most games? Yeah. I'd say so. They certainly should be given what you can do with them anyway.

I tend to assume so, but I've heard it seriously said that 30 shifts is pretty easy. And not by someone stupid.

Easy and short are a bit different. And I still maintain that any game where medium-large rituals are done casually is gonna have huge problems. I mean, a 30 shift ritual is powerful enough that, if you do it easily the whole game's balance shifts profoundly.

So I guess Harry's an idiot for not having access to Wings at all times. I mean, he had time in most of his casefiles for a quick ritual here and there.

Flying isn't the most useful thing ever, I'm actually having a hard time thinking of times he had time the previous scene and it'd be useful.

Oh, and if I don't play at a breakneck pace I'm doing it wrong. So it's just my problem if things break.

Not really what I meant. Wizards are really powerful by design if given room and time to work. The more time you give them, the more powerful. That's just the way the rules work and as long as you're cool with that, give them as much prep as you like.

Doesn't have to be unstoppable to be unfair.

No. But I'm not at all convinced it's even unfair. Wings is cool, but only a game-changer under certain very specific circumstances.

And why wouldn't people be able to pick whatever skills they want?

You need to justify skill distributions somehow, some are harder to justify than others.

Oh, and Beast Change is mostly great for perception and mobility.

True...and it's not bad at all for those things. Not that big a deal when used for those purposes, though.

Prep time is good, but if giving a Wizard a few minutes of it immediately gives everybody a bunch of Powers the game gets pretty wonky.

What's a few minutes? What's a bunch of powers? Even at 5 minutes per ritual (which strikes me as low for Complexity 9+) that's at least half an hour of doing nothing but prep, giving the GM an equal amount of time to prep the villains (or have them set other things in motion). And if you're going with more like 15 minutes or half an hour a piece it becomes more like several hours of prep.

And it'll only last one scene, so you better hope you're close enough to your target that it's not a full scene (no matter how short) getting there. And ignores the whole 'This violates the 2nd Law' issue (I guess if the whole group sans Wizard isn't human at all...).

Tags don't last long enough to break anything normally. You have to use them "almost immediately".

The only actual restriction is that they occur in the same scene...which is more or less the same restriction as when you have access to temporary powers.

[Sanctaphrax]

Where on p. 283? Because I'm not seeing it, to be honest.

Harry's bit could be rewritten as "Hey, Billy. What does it take to transform someone into a form with new Powers?"

That would open up space to replace the brackets at the end with "(Or temporarily-see page 92, but let people use tags instead of Fate Points to pay for the temporary Powers if they want.)

That is indeed a strength of the game for the most part. Doesn't mean it was designed with people who do this at the expense of other things explicitly in mind, it means it was designed so that they wouldn't damage the fun of or be vastly more powerful than people who put the story first.

Like I said, I don't know the intentions.

Not if you work out a definitive ruling the first time. Something I'd strongly advise for this kind of thing.

The thing is that the issues are slightly different each time.

That's true and fair. And a potential issue with the system, but I'm not really arguing it's not, I'm trying to explain why it was done that way and explain how to work around the problem. I've always found problems much easier to work around when you minimize them. In the grand scheme of things, this is a very little problem, and one solvable with a few basic agreements among a gaming group.

It's a pretty big problem by the standards of rules issues in pretend elfgames, actually. A few basic agreements may have worked for you, but it's not always that easy.

I've never in my life had issues with any of this. Indeed, most friend-groups I've had usually enjoy a good argument. And every good GM I've ever had hasn't had any issues with laying down the law when necessary. I'm willing to believe that's not a universal experience, but still it seems to be something worth striving for. And a problem that has nothing at all to do with whatever system you're using. No system's perfect, so they'll all have these issues, and coping strategies are a necessary thing for all of them.

Or in other words: These are legit problems...but they're problems with gaming (or doing so in some groups) not with the DFRPG per se.

This particular segment of DFRPG encourages those problems with gaming, though.

Normally it's okay-ish if not everybody goes in with the same expectations, but where Thaumaturgy is concerned it is not.

True enough. Of course, Reiki can heal that as well with a tad bit more effort. And can be used on others without violating the 2nd Law.

Giving other people Recovery need not violate the Law. If granting Powers is a fair application of transformation magic, granting Recovery ought to be a fair application of healing magic.

Oh, and Reiki explicitly might not be usable on Severe consequences. Says so in the writeup.

No. But I'm not at all convinced it's even unfair. Wings is cool, but only a game-changer under certain very specific circumstances.

...

You need to justify skill distributions somehow, some are harder to justify than others.

Wings is actually a big deal in any fight against a melee character and any scene with obstacles on the ground.

The strongest skill distributions make perfect sense and require no special justification.

True...and it's not bad at all for those things. Not that big a deal when used for those purposes, though.

It's a big deal. It makes you Superb.

What's a few minutes? What's a bunch of powers? Even at 5 minutes per ritual (which strikes me as low for Complexity 9+) that's at least half an hour of doing nothing but prep, giving the GM an equal amount of time to prep the villains (or have them set other things in motion). And if you're going with more like 15 minutes or half an hour a piece it becomes more like several hours of prep.

And it'll only last one scene, so you better hope you're close enough to your target that it's not a full scene (no matter how short) getting there. And ignores the whole 'This violates the 2nd Law' issue (I guess if the whole group sans Wizard isn't human at all...).

The Laws should not be used to balance the game.

Anyway, the rest of what you said runs headlong into the issues of vagueness that Thaumaturgy has. The prep will only take hours if the GM says it does.

The only actual restriction is that they occur in the same scene...which is more or less the same restriction as when you have access to temporary powers.

A tag is subject to one key limitation: it must occur almost immediately after the aspect has been brought into play.

They say it should be used in the same scene "at worst" and that delay should be avoided.

[Deadmanwalking]

Harry's bit could be rewritten as "Hey, Billy. What does it take to transform someone into a form with new Powers?"

That would open up space to replace the brackets at the end with "(Or temporarily-see page 92, but let people use tags instead of Fate Points to pay for the temporary Powers if they want.)

That (or anything similar) would really screw with the dialogue style. Possibly worth it for clarity, but I can definitely see why they were leery of doing it. The marginalia dialogue being fun is one of the neater parts of the book.

Like I said, I don't know the intentions.

Just noting for the record.

The thing is that the issues are slightly different each time.

True...but a few basic guidelines and reasonable people are all you really need.

It's a pretty big problem by the standards of rules issues in pretend elfgames, actually. A few basic agreements may have worked for you, but it's not always that easy.

Not compared to a dozen problems I can think of in a host of other games I've actually played (never mind those I've refused to play based on mechanics). I mean...it's certainly an issue, but even by RPG standards, it's the kind that can be fixed by one guy with no House Rules needed. If you want me to get into problems get me talking about Exalted, Scion, or some areas of NWoD and I'll go on and on. This particular issue is just not that bad comparatively.

This particular segment of DFRPG encourages those problems with gaming, though.

True to some degree. But every game I've ever played has at least one area requiring this kind of adjudication in order to function. this one's far less of a problem than many.

Normally it's okay-ish if not everybody goes in with the same expectations, but where Thaumaturgy is concerned it is not.

Eh...in my experience, clarifying expectations regarding how the game's gonna go and function is always a good call (albeit one often done implicitly to some degree in groups of long standing).

Giving other people Recovery need not violate the Law. If granting Powers is a fair application of transformation magic, granting Recovery ought to be a fair application of healing magic.

I'm not sure I agree. The fact that one area of magic can do something does not necessarily mean that another can as well. Reiki healing or something similar represents external healing magic, Recovery powers actually represent transmogrifying the body so it heals itself better. That's cool. Also risky. Also potentially Lawbreaking if done to others.

Oh, and Reiki explicitly might not be usable on Severe consequences. Says so in the writeup.

True. But then it's very debatable whether temporary Recovery powers help with those, too, so they're both iffy on that one.

Wings is actually a big deal in any fight against a melee character and any scene with obstacles on the ground.

It's pretty easy to work around with just a bit of ingenuity, though. One maneuver plus a tag for effect and I can probably cancel it out for the most part.

The strongest skill distributions make perfect sense and require no special justification.

Possibly, depending on what one considers 'the strongest' a category I'm definitely inclined to think will vary by game.

It's a big deal. It makes you Superb.

You can already use spells to sub in for skills...this may last a bit longer, but it's hardly much better otherwise.

The Laws should not be used to balance the game.

Why not? I was under the impression that was a large part of their purpose (well, after genre emulation, obviously). They're certainly something you can do without, but the game's balance is sorta predicated on their being there.

Anyway, the rest of what you said runs headlong into the issues of vagueness that Thaumaturgy has. The prep will only take hours if the GM says it does.

True to some degree...but even that minimum is pretty long to spend prepping up.

They say it should be used in the same scene "at worst" and that delay should be avoided.

Yes...but it's hardly that restrictive. Reading the whole thing, the basic premise seems to be that you should use them as soon as possible...which isn't at all inconsistent with using them to prep for a fight. You use them in the first few exchanges and you're good.

[Sanctaphrax]

True...but a few basic guidelines and reasonable people are all you really need.

Not so. As proof, I present my own experience.

Not compared to a dozen problems I can think of in a host of other games I've actually played (never mind those I've refused to play based on mechanics). I mean...it's certainly an issue, but even by RPG standards, it's the kind that can be fixed by one guy with no House Rules needed. If you want me to get into problems get me talking about Exalted, Scion, or some areas of NWoD and I'll go on and on. This particular issue is just not that bad comparatively.

There are worse issues, it's true. A large fraction of the RPG market isn't actually playable as-written.

The fact that Dresden mechanics actually work most of the time magnifies this issue, though. In Exalted you expect to ignore the rules and make stuff up all the time. In DFRPG the rules usually help you make stuff up.

You can already use spells to sub in for skills...this may last a bit longer, but it's hardly much better otherwise.

Yes it is. It covers a bunch of skills and can be used repeatedly. Plus it's an awesome disguise.

Why not? I was under the impression that was a large part of their purpose (well, after genre emulation, obviously). They're certainly something you can do without, but the game's balance is sorta predicated on their being there.

Nope.

See, the Laws only apply to humans. And human-ness is a thing with no mechanical cost. People can just say "I'm human" or "I'm not" and they will say both as events warrant.

So if something is overpowered, prohibiting its use against humans just means that anybody with the foolishness to not say "I'm human" is screwed. Or if it's a buff, the opposite is so.

Plus, the Laws apply to methods rather than to effects. And this system offers the right to reflavour methods as long as the mechanical effect remains the same. If some method of doing something is against a Law, it can just be replaced with another method. Make a golem instead of a zombie.

Fortunately, the Laws aren't actually needed for game balance. Seriously, you could ditch 'em totally and the game would remain balanced.

[Deadmanwalking]

Not so. As proof, I present my own experience.

Um...if you give me details I'd be happy to help? Aside from that, I dunno what to say. It's certainly a fairly solvable problem most of the time. I present as evidence basically all the games of DFRPG I've ever played.

There are worse issues, it's true. A large fraction of the RPG market isn't actually playable as-written.

The fact that Dresden mechanics actually work most of the time magnifies this issue, though. In Exalted you expect to ignore the rules and make stuff up all the time. In DFRPG the rules usually help you make stuff up.

I have not found this to be true. Though I do see where you're coming from, there.

Yes it is. It covers a bunch of skills and can be used repeatedly. Plus it's an awesome disguise.

True on the disguise thing. As for the skills, it's nice, but hardly broken compared to a lot of other options easily available.

Nope.

See, the Laws only apply to humans. And human-ness is a thing with no mechanical cost. People can just say "I'm human" or "I'm not" and they will say both as events warrant.

So if something is overpowered, prohibiting its use against humans just means that anybody with the foolishness to not say "I'm human" is screwed. Or if it's a buff, the opposite is so.

Not being able to use certain powers half the time is a real limitation and part of the balance, IMO. The fact that the PCs get to decide which side of the line they're on is hardly relevant. The fact that the GM gets to decide such a thing arbitrarily actually makes the down side worse.

Plus, the Laws apply to methods rather than to effects. And this system offers the right to reflavour methods as long as the mechanical effect remains the same. If some method of doing something is against a Law, it can just be replaced with another method. Make a golem instead of a zombie.

That's not true of all effects. You can't mind control or mind read someone. Period. I think this, as transformation, falls into the same category.

Fortunately, the Laws aren't actually needed for game balance. Seriously, you could ditch 'em totally and the game would remain balanced.

It'd still be pretty reasonable, sure. But that's not the balance the rules are predicated on.

[Sanctaphrax]

Um...if you give me details I'd be happy to help? Aside from that, I dunno what to say. It's certainly a fairly solvable problem most of the time. I present as evidence basically all the games of DFRPG I've ever played.

Eh, most of the problems were a while ago. The issue I'm having with Thaumaturgy right now may or may not be related, but I think I'm handling it well.

(If you're curious, a PbP game just sort of stalled once the players started using Thaumaturgy. The culprit may have been vagueness, coincidence, or simple lack of creativity. I had somebody knock on the door, though, so things are happening again.)

The thing about problems is, if one person has them it doesn't much matter whether another person does. They're there. "No issue" only trumps "issue" if "issue" is a tiny tiny minority. And judging by this place it's pretty common.

Not being able to use certain powers half the time is a real limitation and part of the balance, IMO. The fact that the PCs get to decide which side of the line they're on is hardly relevant. The fact that the GM gets to decide such a thing arbitrarily actually makes the down side worse.

...

That's not true of all effects. You can't mind control or mind read someone. Period. I think this, as transformation, falls into the same category.

Eh, you can do super-empathy or whatever and get whatever mind-reading effects you want. Molly does magic-empathy all the time. Mind control is trickier to replicate, but depending on your GM you may be able to wrangle something.

The first point, incidentally, would be sound if the Laws were used as a balancing point for magic in general and if they could not be narrated around. But they can be narrated around, and the Laws are almost invariably used to handwave away specific issues. Like this one.

[Tedronai]

That's not true of all effects. You can't mind control or mind read someone. Period. I think this, as transformation, falls into the same category.

In Storm Front, when confronted by Morgan over his treatment of Toot, Harry offers 2 defenses.  His first defense is that the magic he performed only implanted a suggestion in the pixie's mind, which was apparently enough to place the case solidly in 'grey magic' territory.  His second defense is that Toot is a Faerie, and thus not protected by the Laws on this matter.

[Deadmanwalking]

Eh, most of the problems were a while ago. The issue I'm having with Thaumaturgy right now may or may not be related, but I think I'm handling it well.

(If you're curious, a PbP game just sort of stalled once the players started using Thaumaturgy. The culprit may have been vagueness, coincidence, or simple lack of creativity. I had somebody knock on the door, though, so things are happening again.)

The thing about problems is, if one person has them it doesn't much matter whether another person does. They're there. "No issue" only trumps "issue" if "issue" is a tiny tiny minority. And judging by this place it's pretty common.

I suppose. It just seems to me like a problem that should be solvable with relatively few hassles. That's likely biasing me in this particular area...

Eh, you can do super-empathy or whatever and get whatever mind-reading effects you want. Molly does magic-empathy all the time. Mind control is trickier to replicate, but depending on your GM you may be able to wrangle something.

Neither of those are direct duplicates or work the same way mechanically. They have similar effects, but I'd argue that the Reiki healing spell is the equivalent of that for acquiring Recovery powers: an alternative with similar but not identical effects that works around the Law.

The first point, incidentally, would be sound if the Laws were used as a balancing point for magic in general and if they could not be narrated around. But they can be narrated around, and the Laws are almost invariably used to handwave away specific issues. Like this one.

I'm...not quite sure what you're arguing here. My original argument was actually that things weren't imbalanced even if the 2nd Law didn't kick in (which I thought it would). That's...not really a hand-wave.

In Storm Front, when confronted by Morgan over his treatment of Toot, Harry offers 2 defenses.  His first defense is that the magic he performed only implanted a suggestion in the pixie's mind, which was apparently enough to place the case solidly in 'grey magic' territory.  His second defense is that Toot is a Faerie, and thus not protected by the Laws on this matter.

Not quite: His first defense was that he neither compelled nor 'suggested' anything magically. All he did was call (the mystical equivalent of "Hey! Over here!") and then trap him, after which he made a bargain. No magical compulsion of any sort.

The second defense was indeed "He's not human." though.

I'm...not sure how this was relevant. I was strictly talking about as applied to humans in the post quoted. I thought that was clear from context, but if not, I apologize for the confusion.

[Sanctaphrax]

I suppose. It just seems to me like a problem that should be solvable with relatively few hassles. That's likely biasing me in this particular area...

It might seem that way but I promise it isn't. I'm reminded of a recent thread on RPGnet, which I think shows the trouble that Thaumaturgy's vagueness gives people.

I'm...not quite sure what you're arguing here. My original argument was actually that things weren't imbalanced even if the 2nd Law didn't kick in (which I thought it would). That's...not really a hand-wave.

I'm thinking more about the people who think Evocation attacks are broken and try to balance them with the First Law.