The Warden Sword As An Item Of Power

[Deadmanwalking]

The item seems balanced enough. I'd probably rather have the standard version...but I'd rather have a well made defensive Item created with high Lore than a belt that gave Inhuman Speed, too. It's all in what you're looking for. 3 Refresh for an all-day-every-day free ability to destroy magic and make Weapon 5 attacks is really pretty good...though quite a bit better for non-Wizards. Hmmm.

Sanctaphrax, might I suggest that, like Sponsored Magic, there be a cost break on Might Over Magic for those with Evocation? Its utility is significantly lower if you can already counterspell. A Warden's Sword would then have to grant some other additional bonus (not sure what), but it seems a good idea for the power in and of itself.

On the off-topic note:

(click to show/hide)

I mostly disagree. The Senior Council are deeply under-powered (though this is noted), and Morgan and Luccio maybe slightly so...but most of the rest are fine (well, Harry, Thomas and Murphy are clearly statted per Book 3 or so at the latest...maybe book 6 for Thomas, but they talk about that). And the issues with the real hardcore Wizards are based mostly on the fact that we've almost never seen them go all-out, at least not in Small Favor or earlier. Really, whose statting do you feel was poorly done?

[Locnil]

That's the crux of my problem with it, aye - also the reason I didn't say anything when I first saw it. For some reason I assumed it would only be taken by martial characters.

Also, a cost break would be rather inefficient. Like I said, I believe the Warden Sword is best done, mechanically speaking, by having it enchance the wielder's native counterspelling ability. It would also explain why it was considered such a big deal - artifacts that reacted differently but still provided the same effect, that remains constantly useful no matter how powerful or weak the wielder is seems incredibly hard to do given what we've seen of that metaphysics behind magic.

And on that off-topic note:

(click to show/hide)

Almost all of them. We've seen highly badass feats pulled off by the main characters, both on-screen and off-screen, that are highly unlikely. It could certainly have happened - a young punk wizard singlehandedly keeping an entire metropolis safe through vigilantism and reputation isn't actually that far-fetched, given the constraints of the setting, but my suspension of disbelief is beginning to break. Also, a more specific example that has been naggin me awhile - Listening is statted up and paid for as an actual ability when Harry uses it what, twice throughout the entire series? Once when there wasn't really a good reason it was necessary? I would have handled it as a combination declaration and apsect invocation. Hell, simply makin Harry pay a fate point for a temporary power on each of those occasions would have been more effectoive, not to mention keeping in line with the way it's used in-series.

Oh, and Harry does what, five or six shifts evocations? That somehow glow hot as the sun, can melt steel, one-shot some creatures and terrify predators into staying away? A guy with a gun and a few stunts can do all that, too.

[Deadmanwalking]

That's the crux of my problem with it, aye - also the reason I didn't say anything when I first saw it. For some reason I assumed it would only be taken by martial characters.

Also, a cost break would be rather inefficient.

Eh,there's precedent and it seems reasonable.

Like I said, I believe the Warden Sword is best done, mechanically speaking, by having it enchance the wielder's native counterspelling ability. It would also explain why it was considered such a big deal - artifacts that reacted differently but still provided the same effect, that remains constantly useful no matter how powerful or weak the wielder is seems incredibly hard to do given what we've seen of that metaphysics behind magic.

Not a bad idea, though I'm not sure I agree on the commentary on artifacts. The Hexenwulf belts and the Swords of the Cross both seem pretty consistent in what they do.


OT Stuff:

And on that off-topic note:

(click to show/hide)

Almost all of them. We've seen highly badass feats pulled off by the main characters, both on-screen and off-screen, that are highly unlikely. It could certainly have happened - a young punk wizard singlehandedly keeping an entire metropolis safe through vigilantism and reputation isn't actually that far-fetched, given the constraints of the setting, but my suspension of disbelief is beginning to break.

(click to show/hide)

How so? I'm really not coming up with any incidents like this. I can explain, casually, how almost every incidentI can think of works in game mechanics. If you can't, maybe start a thread or something, it seems an interesting discussion topic, and I'm pretty sure it'd be informative.

(click to show/hide)

Also, a more specific example that has been naggin me awhile - Listening is statted up and paid for as an actual ability when Harry uses it what, twice throughout the entire series? Once when there wasn't really a good reason it was necessary? I would have handled it as a combination declaration and apsect invocation. Hell, simply makin Harry pay a fate point for a temporary power on each of those occasions would have been more effectoive, not to mention keeping in line with the way it's used in-series.

(click to show/hide)

I actually don't completely disagree here. Still, it's more-or-less an isolated incident. Just about everything else winds up represented pretty appropriately

(click to show/hide)

Oh, and Harry does what, five or six shifts evocations? That somehow glow hot as the sun, can melt steel, one-shot some creatures and terrify predators into staying away? A guy with a gun and a few stunts can do all that, too.

(click to show/hide)

More like 7. And that's as of Small Favor, so he gets better. And that's his bog-standard level, he can pull of 10-12 easily if he's willing to burn some FP and/or sponsor Debt on it (and/or take Consequences)...which is precisely what he does when he does really impressive stuff, he has enough compels to pay for it and more. And if you think 5-6 shift evocations aren't powerful in an objective sense...you aren't paying sufficient attention. That's on par with being hit by a car or ground zero of a grenade blast, never mind what 10 shift ones do.

Wizards are much scarier than gunmen when they start spending FP because they can double-up on it's bonuses by uping their attack and Weapon rating. Also, Harry has a pretty hefty Intimidate skill, and (as he discusses in Turn Coat) has accumulated a scarier rep than he really deserves, capability-wise, basically by being a PC (ie: barely surviving a lot of things, partially by luck, then getting a rep for winning them).

[Sanctaphrax]

Mixed feelings about OW stats. I agree with Locnil about Listening and the Senior Council, and I'd like to add that Shiro's writeup seems really lame to me. He's just not that tough.

Whether or not the Warden ever picks up another IoP, it's still intellectually dishonest to claim the power costs only [-1].

No, it's accurate. Says -1 right there next to the name. It's fair to include the flaw because it's there.

It has the additional opportunity cost of preventing you from using further IoP rebates, but that doesn't mean it doesn't cost the amount of Refresh you pay to get it.

I do regret shutting out Chest Deep Wardens, but that's not avoidable with an IoP Warden Sword.

Lastly, on a somewhat less aggressive mode (I apologize if anyone was insulted or annoyed, btw, that was not my intention) I'd like to ask Sanctaphrax if he minds posting my version of an IoP Warden Sword sometime. I believe you would probably find it overpowered, given what I've noticed about your feel of refresh worth, along with most others, but I'd still like community feedback on it.

Don't worry, I'm very hard to offend.

Can't imagine what reasonable objection I could have to you posting an IoP Warden Sword.

You might be surprised by my reaction.

Sanctaphrax, might I suggest that, like Sponsored Magic, there be a cost break on Might Over Magic for those with Evocation? Its utility is significantly lower if you can already counterspell.

It's more compatible with spellcasting than Inhuman Strength is. And Inhuman Strength gets no cost break.

Once you have spellcasting, investing in essentially any other active ability is a bad idea because you can only use one or the other at any given time.

So giving Wizards swords is a really bad idea, mechanically speaking.

But hey, that's the setting.

Doesn't change the fact it's still horribly suboptimal - for an additional three refresh, you can boost your regular spells by a significant amount, thus boosting your counterspelling, your defensive ability, your offensive ability, and possibly even more.

It's unclear whether elemental foci help with counterspelling, actually. I've never had to care, though, because hardly anybody actually uses Evocation counterspells.

What I said before about giving Wizards swords is still true. It's just not smart, mechanically, to be good at swordsmanship if you can evoke. But that's beyond my ability to fix here.

Also, I feel like you're ignoring the defensive benefits and the extra weapon rating of the warden sword. Once you've made the suboptimal decision to actually use a sword, it's fairly optimal.

[Deadmanwalking]

Once you have spellcasting, investing in essentially any other active ability is a bad idea because you can only use one or the other at any given time.

So giving Wizards swords is a really bad idea, mechanically speaking.

But hey, that's the setting.

I disagree. Wizards need backup for when their Mental Stress is full, and having something you want to use turn-in-turn-out on offense and be good with is worth it for that reason. The thing is...counterspells aren't that thing. Ever. You almost never run into a situation where 5 counterspells in a row are handy, whereas you often run into precisely that situation with physical attacks (like, almost any fight lasting 5 rounds or longer, really). Making a sword, Inhuman Strength, or both potentialy very nice things to have.

There's also the Laws of Magic (the other reason for Wizards to have a non-magic killing device), which really just don't come into it for counterspelling...and though that's more of a setting concern than a balance one per se, a very likely compel of many Wizards High Concept is not using spells on this (human) guy, which, again, makes a basic physical offense handy and there's no equivalent for with counterspells.

[Sanctaphrax]

As a general rule, any resources you invest in winning fights when you're out of spells could be more effectively invested in winning fights with spells.

Because you can fuel spells with consequences, and because Evocation is so damaging, you'll only really run out of spells against a foe who's incredibly tough. And against such a foe a sword isn't gonna do much. You'd be better off maneuvering to boost up a really big spell.

The main benefits of using the Sword instead of an Evocation counterspell are that it doesn't require an Assessment, that you can't blow the control roll, and that you get to add the weapon rating of 5-7 to your roll. The mental stress thing is secondary in my eyes.

[vultur]

I think the main purpose of a Warden sword is to kill warlocks without breaking the first Law.  The "remove magical protections" function is also important, but basically as an aid to killing warlocks with it.

[Gozer]

It seems to me that the thing that people are missing is that the game is based on the book, where violence and the consequences of using it are very serious. Having someone pull out a sword with the intent to use it should be an extraordinarily big deal, and a Warden's sword is as much a symbol of his/her authority as anything else. Any mechanical advantage that they might be giving up should be more than outweighed by that.
The characters in the book, not to mention the game, aren't concerned with the parcing out of the best use of available points for maximum gain, and neither should the players or gm's. Who cares what's the most efficient use of points? This isn't WOW. Make a cool character, tell a good story.
And never underestimate the impact of 4 feet of sharp metal...

[Sanctaphrax]

Ugh, what a terrible philosophy. Shoddy mechanics and poor game balance do not make it easier to tell stories. They get in the way.

If you don't consider what's optimal when you write a game, you'll create a conflict between the story and the mechanics. And then the story will suffer.

And who are you to tell people not to optimize? People have the right to play however they want.

PS: Why is it that people so often bring up WoW when decrying game balance? I've seen it referenced on quite a few forums, and I've never played it and I don't know much about it. So the way it keeps showing up kinda confuses me.

[Deadmanwalking]

Ugh, what a terrible philosophy. Shoddy mechanics and poor game balance do not make it easier to tell stories. They get in the way.

If you don't consider what's optimal when you write a game, you'll create a conflict between the story and the mechanics. And then the story will suffer.

I agree with you entirely. I just think that, in most games, Evocation is costly enough that you often need to resort to other things. I've had players run out of Mental Stress and Consequences they felt free to use on several occasions in various games and need to find alternatives. Of course, I run pretty tough combats, but still.

And who are you to tell people not to optimize? People have the right to play however they want.

True, but some people optimize at the expense of story, no matter what kind of game the GM says they're running (ie: even if they're told to put the story first). These people are annoying (and kinda dumb, it's usually trivially easy to make a fairly optimal character that makes sense story-wise), and make some people...overly defensive.

PS: Why is it that people so often bring up WoW when decrying game balance? I've seen it referenced on quite a few forums, and I've never played it and I don't know much about it. So the way it keeps showing up kinda confuses me.

Like almost all MMORPGs, WoW is entirely focused on performing things in the most mechanically effective manner, with no concern for story or anything of the sort. Or, at least, the vast majority of players on it are, since story isn't really its main function. Being entirely mechanically based it gets brought up on stuff like this.

It's like saying "This isn't a game chess, sacrificing people isn't acceptable when playing moral characters in an RPG." A comparison with a game where X is acceptable with the current game, where it isn't. Or at least isn't considered so by the person making the comparison.

[Sanctaphrax]

I just think that, in most games, Evocation is costly enough that you often need to resort to other things. I've had players run out of Mental Stress and Consequences they felt free to use on several occasions in various games and need to find alternatives.

My experience has been that if you can't take a foe down with Evocation your mundane attacks will be pretty useless. Generally you'd be better served by spending those actions on maneuvers to make your Evocations better.

Like almost all MMORPGs, WoW is entirely focused on performing things in the most mechanically effective manner, with no concern for story or anything of the sort. Or, at least, the vast majority of players on it are, since story isn't really its main function. Being entirely mechanically based it gets brought up on stuff like this.

It's like saying "This isn't a game chess, sacrificing people isn't acceptable when playing moral characters in an RPG." A comparison with a game where X is acceptable with the current game, where it isn't. Or at least isn't considered so by the person making the comparison.

But nobody ever brings up chess. Or Magic, or Halo, or basketball. It's always WoW, for some reason.

[Haru]

But nobody ever brings up chess. Or Magic, or Halo, or basketball. It's always WoW, for some reason.

Feels like a variation on Godwin's Law.

The sword looks good, I like it. I'll use it for the wardens in my games, when they come up. I always felt the swords in the book are a bit lame. And an upgrade from the wizard to the warden template does justify the added refresh.

[UmbraLux]

Ugh, what a terrible philosophy. Shoddy mechanics and poor game balance do not make it easier to tell stories. They get in the way.

Meh, not entirely true.  Stories are 'post facto' - they're a retelling of events not the even itself.  Only mechanics directly manipulating the narrative change the story directly.  With FATE that's mostly the aspect rules.  Other rules are event oriented and have little effect on how a story is told. 

And who are you to tell people not to optimize?

Really?  Pot, meet kettle.  You're both the same color.   
-----
Re: the wardens' swords, I agree with vultur.  They're for killing w/o breaking a Law.

[Deadmanwalking]

My experience has been that if you can't take a foe down with Evocation your mundane attacks will be pretty useless. Generally you'd be better served by spending those actions on maneuvers to make your Evocations better.

I disagree, generally speaking. Assuming you have good enough combat skills actually interact with tougher foes anyway (a Warden with, say, 6-7 shift Evocation and Great Weapons for example).

I mean, IME, players tend to try and take out enemies quickly, and/or get hurt when they don't, which discourages keeping too many Evocations in reserve just so you can use mundane maneuvers to beef them up, and you may well have used some of your Evocations for Maneuvers anyway (3 shifts per Aspect makes one Evocation a tasty chunk of available Aspects, after all). If you have the luxury of the entire group focusing on maneuvers to set up their heavy hitter, you might get away without ever running out...but that's a rare circumstance to have available, again IME.

Of course, that all varies by number of opponents, length of combat, and degree of coordination available to the group. Still, I'd expect my groups are probably not too dissimilar from the average in those respects.

But nobody ever brings up chess. Or Magic, or Halo, or basketball. It's always WoW, for some reason.

WoW's popular and uses a vaguely RPG-like system. It's an easy example. I've occasionally even heard other MMORPGs mentioned. *shrugs*

[Sanctaphrax]

Feels like a variation on Godwin's Law.

The sword looks good, I like it. I'll use it for the wardens in my games, when they come up. I always felt the swords in the book are a bit lame. And an upgrade from the wizard to the warden template does justify the added refresh.

It does a bit, and I'm glad to hear you like it.

Meh, not entirely true.  Stories are 'post facto' - they're a retelling of events not the even itself.  Only mechanics directly manipulating the narrative change the story directly.  With FATE that's mostly the aspect rules.  Other rules are event oriented and have little effect on how a story is told.

People will tell the stories the mechanics the mechanics allow them to tell. If Evocation was cripplingly weak people wouldn't tell stories about combat mages. Or at least, they wouldn't tell as many of those stories.

Really?  Pot, meet kettle.  You're both the same color.   

What?

I don't think I've ever told anybody not to optimize. If anything I've done the opposite...my instinct when giving advice is to recommend optimal builds, but I try not to straight-up tell people how to play.