Swordmage build

[Anders]

Swordmages are mages who channel their magic (bought as advantages with the Magic limitation) through a specially dedicated sword. A dedicated sword is a perk which can be transferred from sword to sword via a ritual* that takes 8 hours and materials costing $100. How much is the Accessibility limitation "requires dedicated sword" worth?

* that is its own Modular ability worth four points (2+2). You can't have more than one slot.

[johndallman]

It looks simplest to buy the powers with gadget limitations (p. B116-117).

[Anders]

That would be great if it was an enchanted sword, but the powers come from the swordmage, and they can channel them to another sword if the other sword is dedicated to them. So it's more akin to an Imbuement, but it can do things that Imbuements can't do, like firing flame jets.

Edit: I'm tempted to go with -20% because that's my default when I don't know.

[coronatiger]

Is it possible to modify the Gadget limitation to make it transferrable?

[Anders]

Originally Posted by coronatiger

Is it possible to modify the Gadget limitation to make it transferrable?

Good question. Some kind of Affliction or Modular Ability maybe? But I still think the Accessibility route is so much easier.

[ravenfish]

Powers prices "requires material components" at -10%. This is usually used for cases such as "needs a bear skin (any bear skin, not one particular one) to transform into a bear", but it could be easily adapted for "needs a sword (any sword, not one particular one) or the ability isn't of any use". The necessary ritual, amounting to "preparation required, but, once prepared, can keep using it forever or until you lose the sword", I would probably rate as a nuisance effect worth not much more than -5%.

[Stormcrow]

Originally Posted by coronatiger

Is it possible to modify the Gadget limitation to make it transferrable?

"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.

[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.

[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).

[maximara]

I had a thought. How about Weapon Master (one weapon) with an accessibility limitation?