Swordmage build

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

"Normally, you can replace a broken or stolen gadget — although this might require significant time and effort (GM's decision)" (p. B117).

So it's already in the rules that gadget-limited traits can be transferred to new objects, and the GM sets the requirements. So all Anders has to do is specify that the power can be transferred to a new sword via the special ritual. Give the abilities the Breakable and Can Be Stolen limitations, and you're done. If these abilities are being expressed as a power, I'd probably just build the gadget limitations into the power modifier for simplicity and note the ritual transference there.

I was just going to say this. Also note that if you can't replace a gadget, you get a -25% modifier for unique, which in my opinion is the most dangerous modifier to put on a gadget.

[ravenfish]

I've generally assumed that "significant time and effort" implies rather more than 8 hours and a hundred bucks. I picture things that could be rebuilt from scratch if needed, but it would be a major project.

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by ravenfish

I've generally assumed that "significant time and effort" implies rather more than 8 hours and a hundred bucks. I picture things that could be rebuilt from scratch if needed, but it would be a major project.

That's a separate feature of the Breakable limitation: "If you cannot repair it, and it requires inconvenient time, effort, or expense to replace (GM's decision), it is worth an additional -15%."

The GM has great leeway with gadget-limited traits. Anders's swordmages seem to fit very nicely in this leeway.

Breakable, DR 6, repairable, SM -3 or -4, -25%;
Can Be Stolen, Quick Contest of ST, will not work for thief, -15%.

[Aldric]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

That's a separate feature of the Breakable limitation: "If you cannot repair it, and it requires inconvenient time, effort, or expense to replace (GM's decision), it is worth an additional -15%."

The GM has great leeway with gadget-limited traits. Anders's swordmages seem to fit very nicely in this leeway.

Breakable, DR 6, repairable, SM -3 or -4, -25%;
Can Be Stolen, Quick Contest of ST, will not work for thief, -15%.

Looks just about right. Up to and including the required cost to replace the gadget if it's gone for good (broken, stolen or whatever).

("significant time and effort" is also part of Unique, which is where the requirement for replacing a lost or destroyed gadget are spelled)

[Anders]

Gadget just feels wrong. The power is in the swordmage, but they have to channel it through a sword. That's different than building it as a gadget, where the power is in the gadget.

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by Anders

Gadget just feels wrong. The power is in the swordmage, but they have to channel it through a sword. That's different than building it as a gadget, where the power is in the gadget.

It's entirely irrelevant. The game rules do exactly what you asked for, and gadget rules are not about "simulating" magic items. The source of power, whether it's yourself or the item, doesn't matter, so long as the combination of you + item = ability.

That is to say, gadget limitations do not assume the power is in the gadget. They just assume that with the gadget, you have the power. That's especially true for the Can Be Stolen limitation with the "will not immediately work for the thief" element.

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

It's entirely irrelevant. The game rules do exactly what you asked for, and gadget rules are not about "simulating" magic items. The source of power, whether it's yourself or the item, doesn't matter, so long as the combination of you + item = ability.

That is to say, gadget limitations do not assume the power is in the gadget. They just assume that with the gadget, you have the power. That's especially true for the Can Be Stolen limitation with the "will not immediately work for the thief" element.

Yeah, although I think you could just rename this case if it worked better for you... maybe borrow the Hero term "Focus" for cases where the ability originates from the character rather than the item.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

So it's already in the rules that gadget-limited traits can be transferred to new objects, and the GM sets the requirements.

On the other hand, if Anders - or his GM, if he isn't the GM for the campaign - feels $100* and 8 hours is insufficient for replacing a Gadget, he's well within his rights to use a lesser Limitation here. That's not even a Rule 0 callout (naturally, everything is within the GM's rights to modify) - as you note, how expensive/difficult a Gadget is to replace is to be set by the GM.

*A sword generally costs markedly more than this to replace, but you're also getting the utility of the sword itself on top of the Gadget-Limited Advantage(s). Given swords are arguably overpriced for what they provide, however, this is a bit more limited than, say, a mage who needs a wand or staff (a baton or quarterstaff, subjected to the same $100 + 8 hour ritual).

Originally Posted by Anders

Gadget just feels wrong. The power is in the swordmage, but they have to channel it through a sword. That's different than building it as a gadget, where the power is in the gadget.

As others have noted, Gadget can be perfectly legitimate for an ability that is inherent in the character, but which he requires some special focus to use (EDIT: Arguably, it can be appropriate for something the character simply believes he/she needs, even if "The magic was in you all along"). I do like the idea of renaming it to Focus in that case, to avoid such confusion (and you don't need to bother writing if it's usable by the thief or not - Focuses should always use the Useless to Thief pricing).

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by Varyon

On the other hand, if Anders - or his GM, if he isn't the GM for the campaign - feels $100* and 8 hours is insufficient for replacing a Gadget, he's well within his rights to use a lesser Limitation here.

Sure. If the question isn't "how do I do this" but rather "how do I do this without using gadget limitations," then that's that. But strictly from the point of view of "can the given rules do this," the answer is a clear "yes" and even "without twisting anything."

*A sword generally costs markedly more than this to replace, but you're also getting the utility of the sword itself on top of the Gadget-Limited Advantage(s).

Sure, but you're paying for that sword with cash or acquiring it during an adventure, and you won't be able to swing that sword at the same time you're using it to cast spells.

As others have noted, Gadget can be perfectly legitimate for an ability that is inherent in the character, but which he requires some special focus to use. I do like the idea of renaming it to Focus in that case, to avoid such confusion (and you don't need to bother writing if it's usable by the thief or not - Focuses should always use the Useless to Thief pricing).

As for renaming, let's remember that you don't put the word "gadget" on the character sheet, so it doesn't really matter what you call it.


Invisibility (Affects Machines, +50%; Can Carry Objects, medium encumbrance, +50%; Switchable, +10%; Swordmagery, -50%) [64]

* Swordmagery power modifier: Magical, -10%; Breakable, DR 6, repairable, SM -3 or -4, -25%; Can Be Stolen, Quick Contest of ST, will not work for thief, -15%.

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by Stormcrow

As for renaming, let's remember that you don't put the word "gadget" on the character sheet, so it doesn't really matter what you call it.

😕 I've always included "gadget" in write-ups before putting any of the special mods on the affected advantage. Maybe I'm the only one?