Talent/spell proficiency - Page 2

Skarg · 10-20-2020, 11:15 AM

I think Henry means he "needs" DX 15 enchanters for it to make any sense to an accountant that magic items would be sold at the listed prices.

hcobb · 10-20-2020, 11:31 AM

Attribute boosts (esp. DX boost) is much harder in Legacy than first edition and a lot of the crafting rules were marginal under the old rules, but the prices where copy and pasted.

GMs should never ever let the little munchkins shop from the book and smile when they say they'll make it themselves.

phiwum · 10-20-2020, 12:45 PM

Thanks.

Doesn't really come up in my games so I plumb forgot that passage.

Helborn · 10-20-2020, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hcobb

ITL 150: "The weekly roll is made against the wizard’s basic DX. Potions, Aid spells, magic items, etc. cannot help."

However a Charm +1 or +2 does.

hcobb · 10-21-2020, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Helborn

However a Charm +1 or +2 does.

Which require potions that cost more to make than they are sold for.

TippetsTX · 10-21-2020, 09:13 PM

Henry, in this proposed model do ALL talents have additional proficiency levels or would that feature be limited to the '1-point' choices?

hcobb · 10-21-2020, 10:20 PM

Are there any non-combat talents that would be blown up by letting characters boost their DX or IQ at considerable cost?

Skarg · 10-22-2020, 12:08 AM

One consideration I see is that many non-combat talents don't really have any rules which use attribute rolls, and some talents do already have advanced levels which don't use this scheme. It seems like an attempt to add a generic mechanic without really thinking about what it's going to mean (if anything) in practice in many cases.

larsdangly · 10-22-2020, 06:39 AM

You have a point; it is a little like pursuing a policy of 'grade inflation' at a school that doesn't use grades.

David Bofinger · 10-22-2020, 06:54 AM

This might increase variety between characters - different characters will choose different spells in which to have proficiency. But I don't think this effect will be very strong. Most people know what the good spells are and most players will be very tempted to add proficiencies to those.

Once they have paid for those spells to be at +3 they'll be very tempted to use them again and again. I mean, they were already the best spells, and now they are even better. The likelihood of dragging out an unusual spell for a fight declines. So the variety of spellcasting within a single character over time declines. IMO that's a bad thing.

I think on balance I'm against the idea.

As a general remark: If you think the new experience system has broken wizards, it's probably best to fix the experience system, rather than bend everything else to fit.

10-20-2020, 11:15 AM	#11
Skarg Join Date: May 2015	Re: Talent/spell proficiency I think Henry means he "needs" DX 15 enchanters for it to make any sense to an accountant that magic items would be sold at the listed prices.

10-20-2020, 11:31 AM	#12
hcobb Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Pacheco, California	Re: Talent/spell proficiency Attribute boosts (esp. DX boost) is much harder in Legacy than first edition and a lot of the crafting rules were marginal under the old rules, but the prices where copy and pasted. GMs should never ever let the little munchkins shop from the book and smile when they say they'll make it themselves. __________________ -HJC

10-20-2020, 12:45 PM	#13
phiwum Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Boston area	Re: Talent/spell proficiency Thanks. Doesn't really come up in my games so I plumb forgot that passage.

10-21-2020, 09:13 PM	#16
TippetsTX Join Date: Sep 2018 Location: North Texas	Re: Talent/spell proficiency Henry, in this proposed model do ALL talents have additional proficiency levels or would that feature be limited to the '1-point' choices? __________________ “No matter how subtle the wizard, a knife between the shoulder blades will seriously cramp his style.” -Vladimir Taltos

10-21-2020, 10:20 PM	#17
hcobb Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Pacheco, California	Re: Talent/spell proficiency Are there any non-combat talents that would be blown up by letting characters boost their DX or IQ at considerable cost? __________________ -HJC

10-22-2020, 12:08 AM	#18
Skarg Join Date: May 2015	Re: Talent/spell proficiency One consideration I see is that many non-combat talents don't really have any rules which use attribute rolls, and some talents do already have advanced levels which don't use this scheme. It seems like an attempt to add a generic mechanic without really thinking about what it's going to mean (if anything) in practice in many cases.

10-22-2020, 06:39 AM	#19
larsdangly Join Date: Dec 2017	Re: Talent/spell proficiency You have a point; it is a little like pursuing a policy of 'grade inflation' at a school that doesn't use grades.

10-22-2020, 06:54 AM	#20
David Bofinger Join Date: Jan 2018 Location: Sydney, Australia	Re: Talent/spell proficiency This might increase variety between characters - different characters will choose different spells in which to have proficiency. But I don't think this effect will be very strong. Most people know what the good spells are and most players will be very tempted to add proficiencies to those. Once they have paid for those spells to be at +3 they'll be very tempted to use them again and again. I mean, they were already the best spells, and now they are even better. The likelihood of dragging out an unusual spell for a fight declines. So the variety of spellcasting within a single character over time declines. IMO that's a bad thing. I think on balance I'm against the idea. As a general remark: If you think the new experience system has broken wizards, it's probably best to fix the experience system, rather than bend everything else to fit.