Apologies I'm a bit late to the thread (had unreliable internet access through a smartphone the last 3 weeks).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plane
Can't say I understand the design of SE though, since by Alternative Abilities the benefit of being able to Will to resist countermeasures seems to exist when using the Alternative Abilities.
Perhaps that is somehow offset by the ability having no inherent value to begin with?
|
Sorcerous Empowerment is a case of Modular Abilities, which is why you can improvise low-cost rituals (any with a point value up to your level of SE) for "free." You can use Godlike Extra Effort ("Hardcore Improvisation") to improvise higher cost rituals instead, but this is tricky and burns FP quickly. This is what SE gives you, aside from an "anchor" for your actual spells.
On the topic of Afflicting oneself with Flight, this is really a case of beneficial Afflictions being problematic as part of an AA set - as such typically need not be used in combat (unless they have an incredibly short duration, or combat was a surprise), needing to swap another ability with such isn't as limiting as for Alternate Attacks and the like. When self-affliction comes into play, this is a case where the Affliction is far better than having the ability itself as part of the AA set. I don't really have a solution*, however.
As for allowing multiple abilities in an AA set, personally I feel you should be able to use as many abilities as can "fit" within the amount of points you paid full cost for. So, a character with [80] in Sorcerous Empowerment, an [80] spell, a [40] spell, three [20] spells, and a plethora of lesser abilities, should be able to use SE improvisation, their [80] spell, their [40] spell
and two of their [20] spells, or any other combination that adds up to [80] or less, without issue. This certainly isn't RAW, but I think it's balanced (and adds more nuance than the RAW "Pay full cost for the most expensive
n abilities" rule).
*Banning beneficial Afflictions from AA means buffing spells cease to be a thing, which invalidates too many character concepts to be acceptable. A possibility might be to say that beneficial Afflictions are turned "off" once you switch from having that spell available, but that seems rather odd, considering baneful Afflictions don't follow such rules (nor really should they - Stupefy, Flesh to Stone, etc should certainly be available without locking you in to using them). Forcing beneficial Afflictions to have an incredibly short duration, such that you'd typically need to actively use them in combat (and constantly have to stop and recast while trying to have your party fly to their destination), is another possibility.