Channeling vs Evocation Cost

[austiknight]

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.

[Mrmdubois]

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.

[Dr.FunLove]

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.

[Vairelome]

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.

[austiknight]

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.

[Mrmdubois]

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.

[Mrmdubois]

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.

[austiknight]

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.

[Mrmdubois]

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...

[Lavecki121]

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

[Vairelome]

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.

[Lavecki121]

I find that statement false especially where a previous poster designed a one element system for evocation

[Vairelome]

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.

[Mrmdubois]

That's true.  No offense.

[JDK002]

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.