Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-10-2016, 08:14 AM   #1
mhd
 
mhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Land of the Beer, Home of the Dirndls
Default [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots

Let's say we have a character with Sorcerous Empowerment for 50 pts.
He's got spells with real costs of 48, 41, 20, 12, 10, 10 and 8 points, actual costs the usual 1/5th.

If I want to have two spells, I pay the full price of the most powerful one and thus can have two of any ready and/or active at the same time.

But what if the sorcerer would be better served by "skipping" a few of the more powerful spells? Let's say the 48 point spell is some kind of transformation, the 41 is a good mind control, the 20 is damage resistance, the rest are all minor attacks or small telekinetic effects.
In this case, I might never need to mind-control someone while being transformed, but I might want to throw some magic missiles. (With magical "weapon control" limits this would seem common enough)

So could I just spend 12 points and thus have two "levels" of spells, where I could have one of each active at a time?

I mean, going purely by the alternative ability rules, this looks ok to me, I'm just asking whether anyone sees problems with the thematics of Sorcery or potential for abuse.
mhd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 08:31 AM   #2
Pseudonym
 
Pseudonym's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Default Re: [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots

I think, Mathematically, what you are saying works out, so it is more of a question of what your GM said.

There are two reasons I can think of that they recommend you only ever buy the most expensive spell:

1) Perhaps the system was built with the inconvenience of requiring you to buy the most expensive spell, and priced like so, in which case, potentially... you might need a small enhancement if you want to wholly purchase weaker spells.

2) It makes things a little weird and complicated when buying new spells at a low tier, and when and if you decide to upgrade and buy a slightly more expensive second spell, so it could just be a bookkeeping consideration.
__________________
Blog Running Games on Tuesday (online). Playing Sunday.
Pseudonym is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 08:38 AM   #3
evileeyore
Banned
 
evileeyore's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 100 hurricane swamp
Default Re: [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhd View Post
So could I just spend 12 points and thus have two "levels" of spells, where I could have one of each active at a time?
Sounds right to me.
evileeyore is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 08:41 AM   #4
Emerald Cat
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
Default Re: [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhd View Post
I mean, going purely by the alternative ability rules, this looks ok to me, I'm just asking whether anyone sees problems with the thematics of Sorcery or potential for abuse.
Well, the Alternative Abilities rules don't themselves force you to take the most expensive version of an attack. And I think that not being able to fill the 2nd slot with your most expensive spells sufficiently offsets the point break. So I don't think this approach is a game breaker.

However, I think that this would be against the intent of the Sorcery system. Reading through Sorcery, it is clearly designed to be a pick up and play system. So adding this complication is out of character for the system.

On that note, I personally wouldn't bother with this as a player. If I'm playing a sorcerer, it is because I (or the GM) want to use a rules-light magic system. I'd rather just buy the full slot and be able to use any 2 spells at once without looking up their point cost.
Emerald Cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 05:02 PM   #5
mehrkat
 
mehrkat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Austin Texas
Default Re: [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots

I've pretty much always done alternative abilities this way including sorcery.
__________________
He stared out in the distance to see the awesome might of the Meerkat war party.
mehrkat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 06:37 PM   #6
PK
 
PK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dobbstown Sane Asylum
Default Re: [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots

While I consider this a bit too complex to ever try cramming into the RAW, it's mathematically sound and I would allow it as a GM.
__________________
Reverend Pee Kitty of the Order Malkavian-Dobbsian (Twitter) (LJ)

MyGURPS: My house rules and GURPS resources.

#SJGamesLive: I answered questions about GURPS After the End and more!
{Watch Video} - {Read Transcript}
PK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2016, 08:44 PM   #7
starslayer
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Default Re: [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots

Why wouldn't your approach be to 'split' your sorcerous empowerment and make it greater.


IE- if you have 65 points in sorcerous empowerment then you can 'turn on' 48 points in attack spell, and 12 points in shield spell.

Then you have a greater base of empowerment for cantrips and the like as well.

If your GM does not allow a 'dynamic' split- than instead buy:

Sorcerous empowerment 50 to alt to your main spells
Sorcerous empowerment 15 to alt to your secondary spells

You still have 65 points of empowerment, and you get to cleanly define a 'primary' and 'seconday' spellset.
starslayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 02:00 AM   #8
mhd
 
mhd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Land of the Beer, Home of the Dirndls
Default Re: [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots

Quote:
Originally Posted by Emerald Cat View Post
However, I think that this would be against the intent of the Sorcery system. Reading through Sorcery, it is clearly designed to be a pick up and play system. So adding this complication is out of character for the system.
Well, I regard the core mechanics of Sorcery as an embellishment on the "Magic as Powers" principle, adding the ability to improvise and power up to it. If the grimoire as given isn't sufficient or matches the campaign, you'll end up constructing a lot of Powers, which is about as complex as GURPS can get.

So for me as a GM in this campaign, Sorcery is a building block, not a black box. Also, we don't have that many points to go around. So, sure, a 50+48 setup might be conceptually simpler, but 50+10 would be way easier to afford, yet still sufficient (combat powers don't usually reach the Empowerment limits due to balancing issues).

And I think my sorcerer players should be able to handle it. If you've just have to "levels", it's just marking those that can be put into your lesser slot (or sorting them by cost and drawing a line). Multiple different levels would get messy, but I don't see a need for that anyway...
(Complexity could be further reduced by saving some powers from being turned into afflictions this way)
mhd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 02:18 AM   #9
Nereidalbel
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Ellicott City, MD
Default Re: [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots

It's no different than using Alternative Ability Sets. Just note which things fit with which set on your sheet and call it good.
Nereidalbel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.