Social Strata and Magic Ability

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by isf

Yes, but now there are non-nobles with SE, I would imagine that there are plenty of groups that would be interested in that for good or bad.

That's actually a good point. It also makes bastards from high power bloodlines viable spouses.

Originally Posted by Anders

Make the ability to enchant items a fluke - only one in a hundred or one in a thousand can do it. Maybe a genetic ability - there's one noble family that can enchant items and they are required by law to supply everyone equally. Which of course means they are overworked as heck, but also rich as Croesus. There's a social code that says they do not take part in politics - and maybe there are factions that want to overturn this code.

And then operationalise this as an Unusual Background. 25 to 50 points should be plenty.

That's a cool idea. Kind of like the Spacer Guild from Dune. (Which is one of the things I'm emulating to a degree with the setting.)

[Anders]

The enchanter family would be inbred to hell and back, to maximise the number of enchanters they can churn out. Meaning they will have all kinds of strange physical and mental... peculiarities. Sorcery doesn't really require high IQ, just as long as you can understand what the customer wants, so savant syndrome may be the way they turn out.

Another way to go would be to make enchanting dangerous. Maybe making an enchanted object requires a roll on the Threshold Calamity table, with a modifier depending on how powerful the item is. Or maybe it gives you Corruption. This would also quickly lead to enchanters being "strange."

[Christopher R. Rice]

Originally Posted by Anders

The enchanter family would be inbred to hell and back, to maximise the number of enchanters they can churn out. Meaning they will have all kinds of strange physical and mental... peculiarities.

Another way to go would be to make enchanting dangerous. Maybe making an enchanted object requires a roll on the Threshold Calamity table, with a modifier depending on how powerful the item is. Or maybe it gives you Corruption. This would also quickly lead to enchanters being "strange."

Hmm. That's not a bad idea really. I'll have to think about this.

[Turhan's Bey Company]

Originally Posted by Christopher R. Rice

What else would you say is problematic?

I have no strong opinions about this, that being a question of what the individual GM believes will break their world. For example, I generally wouldn't regard enchantment as an issue, but it appears to be for your campaign. That said, DF's approach to modifying magical effects is a pretty decent start.

Originally Posted by Christopher R. Rice

Can you point me to where this is. I cannot find it.

http://www.warehouse23.com/products/SJG37-2687

[Prince Charon]

If you want to follow the old 'lost secrets of the past' trope, it could be that Enchanting was once common, but now the method is forgotten, perhaps because the only family or families who could do it died out due to excessive inbreeding and/or internal conflicts.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Christopher R. Rice

The current problem with wildcards is that the Qi attribute may be priced too low. I'm starting to think it might be better off at 15 or 20 level instead of 10. I'm still thinking about it.

Since Powers have to spend a +20% surcharge to use Qi as an attribute and there are no skills based on QI except power skills I dont think so.
Besides the skills its mostly like Will or HT in providing energy and resistance vs, some powers. I think pricing it as HT is therefor appropriate.
The downside to the 10/level price is its easy to buy up so you have higher average than if it were 15 or 20 points a level. If you want to counter that I suggest 20 points like IQ or DX but removing the surcharge modifier on powers.

Originally Posted by Anders

Another way to go would be to make enchanting dangerous. Maybe making an enchanted object requires a roll on the Threshold Calamity table, with a modifier depending on how powerful the item is. Or maybe it gives you Corruption. This would also quickly lead to enchanters being "strange."

Since its based on the elements working with an element could unbalance your chi which has physical and mental issues. Due to financial and time costs as suggested as above most probably specialize (plus certain things would be better rewarded economically or politically) but then those enchanters are more vulnerable to unbalanced chi. The longer more diverse route is thus more expensive and time consuming.

Also high chi items could attract spirits or monsters that want to feed on them so owning magic items itself can be dangerous as is being around those who do. The exception being items with their own spirit such as the godhand weapons as the spirit makes it much harder for things to feed on it. That gives you family and ancestral items where mages sacrifice some or all of thier spirit to make them which they are unlikely to do for mere coin.
Using the rules for Soulbroker could also be in effect, especially to create items. Then over time they buy off the requires character points to use them as more and more users have poured energy into them. Most would trade it in for a simple costs fatigue limitation, with a few (probably well used heirloom items) not even having that.

[Kallatari]

If enchanting a magical item using sorcerous empowerment requires the expenditure of character points, why not make that an actual in-game element of the process rather than just a metagame concept?

What if enchanting requires the enchanter to actually put a part of his soul/essence/power/chi into the object. And it comes at the cost of weakening him... perhaps those points come out of ability scores, or it lowers the Sorcerous Empowerment or Qi (I'm assuming that's your "Magic" attribute). Edit: After all, gaining character points is a metagame concept, and unlikely to occur for any NPC, so the points have to come from somewhere. And maybe the item becomes a back door for targeting the enchanter... you can charm the enchanter by casting charm on the sword he made.

An enchanter will only be able to enchant a few items before he burns out his magical ability/potential. Enchanting items therefore is likely only going to occur when it's important, or as a gift representing a great honor ("You have saved me and I owe you my life, so please take this magical sword empowered by the life you have saved.")

Part of this makes the assumption that only the enchanter can spend part of his soul/essence/magic and can't steal it from others. If you can steal from others, I can see enchanting getting a bit dark and sacrificial in nature (rumors of such black magic might exist, though).

And you still need all the training to become an enchanter. You can't just decide to enchant something when you're near death just because... so becoming an enchanter is literally a life-long commitment.

This could also lead to a cultural incorporation of enchantment. When a powerful family mage is getting close to death, perhaps he (culturally) ritually sacrifices his magic to make an item for his family, as his legacy to live on pass his own death. Magic items become very linked to heritage/inheritance, and most noble families would take a dim view of people using items created by the magical-power sacrifice of their ancestors.

Most magical items encountered by players are therefore from deceased enchanters because of the costs involved.

Then throw in the rumor that some enchantments also sometimes pass on a part of the personality of the enchanter, as an unexplained side-effect. When used properly, or certain feats are accomplished with the item, they can gain sentience (if you have sentient items in your setting).. or a semi-sentience/willfulness of their own. Or just have rumors of such things even if they don't actually exist.

[AlexanderHowl]

You could have magical gadgets instead of magical items. Every 25 days of enchanting invests 1 CP worth of traits into the magical trait. A price of $10,000 per CP would probably keep things balanced.

[Pragmatic]

There's a two-book series (Sorcerors of Verdun, by Stovall).

In it, the world knows of sorcerors. It's WW 1, and there are sorcerors in the trenches.

One of the sorcerors is a cross-dressing woman (hiding her gender, so she can fight) who fled an arranged marriage.

Bloodlines are protected with deadly earnest. Breeding in a new ability is considered paramount. Pretty good series.

The sorcerous powers of the Austrian-Hungarian imperial family... yikes!

Edit: And it addresses sorcerous enchanting, something that was THOUGHT to be impossible...

Spoiler:  

They use the blood of sorcerors to enchant non-living items. And to give a little of the power to other sorcerors.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Christopher R. Rice

Not really, commoners with magic potential keeps the crops growing, the mines open, etc. You don't throw away a specialized tool like that.

Oh, I'm sure that's how things were supposed to work in the beginning, but there is too much incentive for the nobles to take all the power for themselves. You simultaneously take away the capability of the common to effectively revolt and take away the motivation for a revolt by making the commoners reliant on the nobles' good will to eat and live in any comfort.

That's power and it would only take generation of nobles to make it so.

(Yeah, I strongly favor dystopian settings ovet utopian ones)