Charms First, Upside-Down Alchemy

[Gudiomen]

Do you think it would be balanced to have an alternate skill to Alchemy that had Charms as the default techniques, at no penalty and elixirs at -2 instead?

How about a skill that only allowed Charms (no elixirs, philosophers stones, etc...) would that be Hard instead of Very Hard?

Seems like bringing charms into the spotlight would give rise to a different flavor of enchanted objects.

[SimonAce]

Sure. Why not? You could have three skills, each defaulting to one another at -2, Charmcraft, Herbalism and Alchemy if you liked. Charmcraft would let you make charms, Herbalism would use cheaper "raw" ingredients (but be limited in what it could make) and Alchemy could do elixirs. Combined with some Divination magic it would make the basis for a pretty neat magic system

[Captain-Captain]

In fact you could increase the penalties if a charm of the elixir being made isn't brewed in the mix as a catalyst to start the magic going. The 10 x normal time to make gives the item time to pick up magic. The faster elixirs tend to not catch the magic without aid.

[Gudiomen]

I'm thinking this for a "naturalist" race, I'd like subtler kinds of magic.

By adding -2 on top of the existent penalties for elixir I can make the flashy ones even harder, flashy charms don't bother me so much as it kind of fits the aesthetics of the race to have charmed raven feathers tied to their hair, little leather bags with imbued seeds tied to their wrists, blood soaked wooden rings, etc...
It also strikes me that by focusing on charms instead of elixirs the rarity of the ingredients isn't so much an issue, as charms are balanced more by the time it takes to make them and their recharge rate. So the process can be more "woodland" and less "arcane". For instance, the bother will be basking the amulet in the unlight of the new moon, not acquiring dragon's blood or nahalian onyx powder.

---

As a related issue, would you allow a character in a game you GM that otherwise has standard Alchemy to use a perk to have the "charms first" version of Alchemy?

[Captain-Captain]

Originally Posted by Gudiomen

I'm thinking this for a "naturalist" race, I'd like subtler kinds of magic.

By adding -2 on top of the existent penalties for elixir I can make the flashy ones even harder, flashy charms don't bother me so much as it kind of fits the aesthetics of the race to have charmed raven feathers tied to their hair, little leather bags with imbued seeds tied to their wrists, blood soaked wooden rings, etc...
It also strikes me that by focusing on charms instead of elixirs the rarity of the ingredients isn't so much an issue, as charms are balanced more by the time it takes to make them and their recharge rate. So the process can be more "woodland" and less "arcane". For instance, the bother will be basking the amulet in the unlight of the new moon, not acquiring dragon's blood or nahalian onyx powder.

---

As a related issue, would you allow a character in a game you GM that otherwise has standard Alchemy to use a perk to have the "charms first" version of Alchemy?

I generally don't like one set of rules for one Pc and another for others. it makes for potential headaches. In a 'Standard Alchemy' game I'd probably charge your character 20 pts of Unusual Background.

[Gudiomen]

I'm not a big fan of it either, but in this case it would be only to allow a novel skill, no headaches associated.

I'd never charge 20 cp (!) for something so trivial, better to forbid it then to cripple a character for being different. Unusual Background should not be a "tax", it should reflect the surprise/rarity/unique value of something different or unexpected. Here it represents +2 to charms, -2 to elixirs (that need to be acquired as techniques), and the main use of the skill becomes 10x slower. In some perspectives it might be seen as a negative change. I'd either charge a 1cp unusual background as a perk, not charge anything or disallow it entirely.

[Kalzazz]

Id call it a 0 pt feature

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by Gudiomen

I'm not a big fan of it either, but in this case it would be only to allow a novel skill, no headaches associated.

I'd never charge 20 cp (!) for something so trivial, better to forbid it then to cripple a character for being different. Unusual Background should not be a "tax", it should reflect the surprise/rarity/unique value of something different or unexpected. Here it represents +2 to charms, -2 to elixirs (that need to be acquired as techniques), and the main use of the skill becomes 10x slower. In some perspectives it might be seen as a negative change. I'd either charge a 1cp unusual background as a perk, not charge anything or disallow it entirely.

Charms are generally more useful than their elixir counterparts, so the GM should take care to emphasize the extra time commitment as a balancing factor. With that in mind, I'd say that the two styles are similar enough to not worry about UBs.