06-10-2016, 08:14 AM | #1 |
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Land of the Beer, Home of the Dirndls
|
[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. |
06-10-2016, 08:31 AM | #2 |
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Phoenix, AZ
|
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. |
06-10-2016, 08:38 AM | #3 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 100 hurricane swamp
|
Re: [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots
|
06-10-2016, 08:41 AM | #4 | |
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Cincinnati, OH, USA
|
Re: [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots
Quote:
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. |
|
06-10-2016, 05:02 PM | #5 |
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Austin Texas
|
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. |
06-10-2016, 06:37 PM | #6 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Dobbstown Sane Asylum
|
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} |
06-10-2016, 08:44 PM | #7 |
Join Date: Dec 2006
|
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. |
06-11-2016, 02:00 AM | #8 | |
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Land of the Beer, Home of the Dirndls
|
Re: [Sorcery] Less powerful secondary slots
Quote:
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) |
|
06-11-2016, 02:18 AM | #9 |
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Ellicott City, MD
|
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.
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|