[Sorenant]

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

This sounds less like a spell and more like a "class feature" - if that's the case, I probably wouldn't build it as a spell at all. Give the character Flight (Winged, Switchable), Sharp Claws (Switchable), and so forth, bought at full cost (minus the price of limitations, of course). If they can be dispelled or go away in no-mana areas, they get the Magical limitation as well.

If you're dead-set on them being spells, well, I'd say the answer is simply to build them as Sorcery abilities. The player can't avoid paying more-or-less full price for advantages that are always on. That's the way the system works.


Well, it's not official for all of Sorcery, but in my article Super-Sorcery in Pyramid #3/105, I suggested a couple of tweaks to the system to help save costs for superhero-magicians using Sorcery, which may work for you here. The first is to make it so that only the levels of Sorcerous Empowerment that equal the cost of the highest point-value spell the sorcerer knows become unavailable - the other levels remain. So, for example, if the sorcerer had Sorcerous Empowerment 2 for 30 points, then when they cast the 20-point spell, the first level of Sorcerous Empowerment would be "tied up", but the remaining level would be available to cast another spell - conveniently exactly enough to throw one of those 1-point cantrips.

The second option I presented was that, in the case of leveled spells, you can pay the full cost of just enough levels to match the cost of the next-most-expensive spell, and then be able to cast the spell simultaneously with others at the level you paid the full cost for, only becoming unable to cast spells simultaneously if you were using the most-expensive spell at higher power. So, for example, if that 20-point spell was actually Sunbolt level 5, the sorcerer could pay the full cost of one level (4 points), and buy the rest of the levels at 1/5th cost, allowing them to throw level 1 Sunbolts silmultaneously with a cantrip, and only losing access to the cantrips if they want to cast a level 2 or higher Sunbolt spell.

Thanks for the advice. Your optional increases Sorcerer's flexibility which is something I really like. I'll adopt both of it in addition to the
PK's Sorcerer Revisited's buff to indefinite duration spells. It would allow the Sorcerer to fly around for an hour spending "only" 6FP, this should be physically and mentally tiring enough to make him stop and rest (I'm houseruling FP spent on magic can be recovered with Meditation much like Breath Control recover physical FP expenditure) for a while. In addition, thanks to your rule it should be more feasible for him to do get his claws, scales and wings up and use Flying Brick style (which I just noticed was written by you too, nice!).

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

Well, I'd suggest that the player compare the utility, with Weapon of Pure Magic, of having a weapon that can never, ever be lost, is always ready to hand when you need it, and can affect things that are only harmed by magic, against the utility of that katana with Signature Gear. The latter can be lost or taken away - Signature Gear definitely doesn't prevent someone from using the Disarm technique, or capturing you and taking all your stuff. All it does is ensure that the item has "plot protection" - if it is taken away, you'll have the chance to get it back. As for the Wealth, well, that's got even less plot protection - if you lose your masterwork katana that you just bought with wealth, then you'll have to go out and find a new one, and there's no guarantee that it will be easily available.

Also, where's the 9-point cost coming from? The Greatsword of Pure Magic, which is probably the closest to a katana, only costs 4 points.

Sorry, was kinda tired and got a few things messed up. First of all, because I had just commented on Chinese Elemental Powers and just wrote the innate attack's full price. Second, the swordsman actually mentioned some value like 15 (Limited Scope Sorcery + spell cost). I'll present him hte arguments that 1) Very Wealthy steps into kuge/aristrocracy territory rather than a samurai, 2) it's easier to get nice things like Affect Insubstantial with sorcerous sword rather than a physical one and 3) thanks to your optional rule he could later improve his sorcery so he could simultaneously use Imbue on his magical weapon.

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

I'd allow Weapon Fencer for two-handed weapons (given its source, it's almost certainly intended - the whole point is to allow samurai types to be super-fencers with their katanas). However, I wouldn't allow the parry penalty reduction to stack here. The two sources are fundamentally different - the fencing parry is from the fact that fencing weapons are quick and easy to move from "attack" into "defense" postures, and easy to move back to a ready defensive posture after being knocked out of line by the force of parrying an attack. Whereas the two-weapon parry penalty reduction is more because you simply have to move the weapon less at all in order to be in a good place to defend - it's bigger, so it covers more area inherently basically.

More significantly, though, is the simple fact that it's unbalanced. Normally, to get double the parry penalty reduction, you have to invest in an expensive advantage, Weapon Master. It's not fair to give that benefit for only 1 point.

Note that the other benefit of a fencing weapon would still apply when wielding a two-handed weapon, however - the bonus to retreats.

I think he will be a little disappointed but I'll still suggest him to get it. I'll probably have to throw a few foes that uses Deceptive Attacks because of their power level and I'm sure the swordsman would really appreciate his parry bonus in such cases.

Originally Posted by Kelly Pedersen

Personally, I don't think anything breaks. Defaults between weapons are already... well, not punitive, as such. But the mechanics of buying up from default basically means that almost no-one does it, and it's basically not cost-effective to do it for more than one skill for sure. Making them techniques means it's cost-effective to do it for at least one or two skills, and might encourage someone to do that. I say go for it.

Happy to hear that, I'll run it.