Charges that never recover

[iamlibertarian]

(Background thought: Some GMs seem more afraid of Magick Pools than of Gadget Pools, even though they can do the very same things, just with a different flavor.)

 

Think in superhero terms, not Fantasy Hero: Thoughts on these comparisons?

 

A Priest has a God's Blast spell with charges. It simply recharges the next dawn. No GM has a problem with that.

Gadget Pool blaster with charges which DO recover. The Gadgeteer simply takes the blaster with him after using all of its charges, the blaster absorbs natural energy from the surrounding world, and by morning it has fully recharged. Nobody seems to have trouble with this.

 

Wand of Magic Missile in a VPP which has a blast and charges which DO recover. The Mage simply waits overnight as the wand absorbs naturally occurring Mana in the air and the wand is recharged. Again, nobody seems to have a problem with this.

 

-----

Compare to:

 

Priest has a God's Gifts VPP and a STR blessing with Time Limit and charges which his God naturally recharges overnight. No problem

Gadgeteer's Suit of Powered Armor with charges and Time Limit granting bonus STR points with charges which DO recover. Gadgeteer again goes lets it recharge in the same manner as above overnight, and next day, fully charged again. Easy enough and GMs are cool with it.

 

Alchemist who creates a Potion of STR with Time Limit with charges which DO recover. Should not the vials just mystically refill overnight, without the 're-brewing process'? To mollify the GM, the equivalent might be to have a cauldron at home continuously bubbling away. Next day more of the potion is ready to be scooped up into a vial without another lick of effort. That is still more effort than the Priest or Gadgeteer have to go through, as they never have to "go home and perform a task" to recharge. Even with the 'going home and refilling the vial,' GMs already begin to get nervous, but not too much.

 

-----

Compare to: (I am leaving out Recoverable Charges, because those represent powers which can be Recovered in just minutes out of combat.)

 

Priest's STR Blessing, charges do NOT just automatically recharge. Priest has to go to a shrine/temple, pray all day and make an appropriate offering to his God before the Blessing can be cast again. Doesn't seem to be a problem for GMs. This is much more than just, say, re-setting a trigger.

 

Gadgeteer creates a blaster or suit of STR with charges which do NOT recover. When those charges are gone, to have that power in the pool again, he must rebuild the blaster or suit, or take a lot of extra time to tinker with it and put in a new power source, etc. Until then, he is without that power. Nobody seems to have trouble with that.

Potion with charges which do NOT recover. Must go through lengthy re-cast / re-brew efforts, just like the Gadgeteer and Priest, but GMs start to get Very nervous and dislike it very much.

1) What is it about the Potion or Magic that bothers people/GMs so much but not the Gadgeteer or Priest?

 

2) Now compare it to a Scroll with writing which disappears after use (6E 372). Those charges never recover, but somebody created that scroll. You get a -2 Limitation for that. But *somebody* had to write that scroll. So I assume it should be ok for the character to be the one to re-write it, again taking prep time and casting/writing efforts, just as in the last 3 cases above. But some GMs have a problem with that, as if they think doing so unbalances the game in ways that the Priest and Gadgeteer do not?

3) If the Scroll re-writing / re-casting / extra time to create efforts are worth a -2 Limitation, should not the Potion re-brewing, Gadgeteer recreating / tinkering / replacing the power source extra time, and the Priest prayer time / offerings, all get the -2 Limitation? I don't get it.

Thanks! DC

[Lord Liaden]

I've used the "Never Recover" Limitation, for both Charges and Endurance Reserve, to reflect abilities that use up materials or energy that the character does not automatically regain. In those circumstances I define particular activities which, if successfully completed, earn the character Experience Points which they can only devote to buying more of the stuff that Never Recovers. For example, a wizard brewing potions has to take the time to gather the necessary materials, and mix and brew the ingredients, requiring one or more Skills. If they succeed at their Skill Roll, they gain a mutually-agreed-upon number of XP with which to "refill" their potions. Those XP can also be used to buy up the ability beyond its original maximum, assuming they haven't already expended some of it; allowing the maximum to grow or shrink based on use. In the previous example, this can reflect the number of potions the wizard may have on hand at any one time.

[Lucius]

 

What you describe does not match my experience.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Recovering a palindromedary

[iamlibertarian]

What you describe does not match my experience.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Recovering a palindromedary

 

In what way does it not match your experience? You or your GMs do not seem to get leery of magick with a VPP? At least not in comparison to the other types with a VPP?

 

If that is the case, I need to play under your GMs, lmao.

 

Any thoughts on what I said in #s 2) and 3)? If a Scroll with words that disappear (charges which do not recover) gets a -2 Limitation, should not Potions get the same treatment?

 

And should not Potions which do Not have charges which do not recover be able to recharge in the same manner as other items with charges which automatically recover the next day?

 

Thanks!

DC

[Lucius]

In what way does it not match your experience?

 

Well,

 

(Background thought: Some GMs seem more afraid of Magick Pools than of Gadget Pools, even though they can do the very same things, just with a different flavor.)

I haven't noticed such a tendency, but if there is one, it seems explicable in terms of the fact that a Gadgeteer created GADGETS - things that can be broken or taken away. "magic" as a special effect may be seen as very general and unlimited and "do anything" in a way that other special effects don't match.

 

Think in superhero terms, not Fantasy Hero: Thoughts on these comparisons?

If I thought in superhero terms, I'd run a superhero game. I run a fantasy game because I think in fantasy terms. But I'll try.

 

A Priest has a God's Blast spell with charges. It simply recharges the next dawn. No GM has a problem with that.

Some would. Some have a problem with Gods, or with having Gods that hand out powers to their favorites like candy canes.

 

Gadget Pool blaster with charges which DO recover. The Gadgeteer simply takes the blaster with him after using all of its charges, the blaster absorbs natural energy from the surrounding world, and by morning it has fully recharged. Nobody seems to have trouble with this.

I find it hard to believe no one has a problem with this. "absorbs natural energy from the surrounding world?" Plugging into wall socket's not convenient enough for you?

 

Wand of Magic Missile in a VPP which has a blast and charges which DO recover. The Mage simply waits overnight as the wand absorbs naturally occurring Mana in the air and the wand is recharged. Again, nobody seems to have a problem with this.

Okay I just NOW noticed you're putting all these into a Variable Power Pool. Now, some people might have an issue with this depending on how the Pool changes. If you exhaust the charges in the gun, can you switch those points into some other gadget now that has no charges, or has charges that haven't been expended - maybe even a slightly different gun with different Advantages?

 

 

-----

Compare to:

 

Priest has a God's Gifts VPP and a STR blessing with Time Limit and charges which his God naturally recharges overnight. No problem

 

Gadgeteer's Suit of Powered Armor with charges and Time Limit granting bonus STR points with charges which DO recover. Gadgeteer again goes lets it recharge in the same manner as above overnight, and next day, fully charged again. Easy enough and GMs are cool with it.

See above for potential uncool problems.

 

Alchemist who creates a Potion of STR with Time Limit with charges which DO recover. Should not the vials just mystically refill overnight, without the 're-brewing process'? To mollify the GM, the equivalent might be to have a cauldron at home continuously bubbling away. Next day more of the potion is ready to be scooped up into a vial without another lick of effort. That is still more effort than the Priest or Gadgeteer have to go through, as they never have to "go home and perform a task" to recharge. Even with the 'going home and refilling the vial,' GMs already begin to get nervous, but not too much.

IF it is in fact the case that the priest and gadgeteer "never have to go home and perform a task" then you may have a point. But I see that as a big if. I expect priests to have to, if not necessarily "go home" still perform prayer and ritual on a daily basis to maintain their potent connection to the Source from which their Blessings Flow. I expect gadgeteers have to put in time on maintenance, plug things into some power source to recharge, etc.

 

 

-----

Compare to: (I am leaving out Recoverable Charges, because those represent powers which can be Recovered in just minutes out of combat.)

 

Priest's STR Blessing, charges do NOT just automatically recharge. Priest has to go to a shrine/temple, pray all day and make an appropriate offering to his God before the Blessing can be cast again. Doesn't seem to be a problem for GMs. This is much more than just, say, re-setting a trigger.

 

Gadgeteer creates a blaster or suit of STR with charges which do NOT recover. When those charges are gone, to have that power in the pool again, he must rebuild the blaster or suit, or take a lot of extra time to tinker with it and put in a new power source, etc. Until then, he is without that power. Nobody seems to have trouble with that.

 

Potion with charges which do NOT recover. Must go through lengthy re-cast / re-brew efforts, just like the Gadgeteer and Priest, but GMs start to get Very nervous and dislike it very much.

I don't see a problem here other than those already mentioned, except that the more you Limit a Power, the less you pay for it, and may be seen as getting "more bang for your buck." Which is true, until the bang runs out and then you're bangless for a time.

 

 

THIS IS A QUOTE. I HAVE POSTED MORE THAN THE ALLOWED NUMBER OF BLOCKS OF QUOTED TEXT SO HAVE TO RESORT TO MARKING SOME THIS WAY

1) What is it about the Potion or Magic that bothers people/GMs so much but not the Gadgeteer or Priest? END QUOTE

 

IF (another big if) your premise is even correct that magic is regarded as more problematic, I'd guess it is that the gadgeteer has obvious restrictions built into their special effect, the priest has a God to answer to, and the mage is seen as more totally unrestricted.

 

 

THIS IS A QUOTE. I HAVE POSTED MORE THAN THE ALLOWED NUMBER OF BLOCKS OF QUOTED TEXT SO HAVE TO RESORT TO MARKING SOME THIS WAY

2) Now compare it to a Scroll with writing which disappears after use (6E 372). Those charges never recover, but somebody created that scroll. You get a -2 Limitation for that.END QUOTE

 

Okay, my answers above have been assuming that when you say "don't automatically recover" you're NOT referring to "Do not recover" but to "Recovers under limited circumstance." This would change my answer.

 

THIS IS A QUOTE. I HAVE POSTED MORE THAN THE ALLOWED NUMBER OF BLOCKS OF QUOTED TEXT SO HAVE TO RESORT TO MARKING SOME THIS WAY

But *somebody* had to write that scroll. So I assume it should be ok for the character to be the one to re-write it, again taking prep time and casting/writing efforts, just as in the last 3 cases above. But some GMs have a problem with that, as if they think doing so unbalances the game in ways that the Priest and Gadgeteer do not?END QUOTE

 

Yep, that's a problem. And if you think it's NOT a problem for a priest or gadgeteer or anyone else with a Variable Power Pool, I suspect that you are sadly mistaken. This would ALWAYS be a problem.

 

The problem is that if you put points from your Pool into a Power with Charges that never Recover, and use the Charges, those points are GONE.

 

Repeat, GONE. You can't put them into another spell or gadget or miracle. They're expended because you decided to make them expendable. Sure you got a hefty Limitation and a temporary big (perhaps unbalancing) boost to your power, but your character is now in the long term crippled by having invested points permanently in something that will never again give them any returns on that investment.

 

THIS IS A QUOTE. I HAVE POSTED MORE THAN THE ALLOWED NUMBER OF BLOCKS OF QUOTED TEXT SO HAVE TO RESORT TO MARKING SOME THIS WAY3) If the Scroll re-writing / re-casting / extra time to create efforts are worth a -2 Limitation, END QUOE=TE

 

I think you may need to be more specific about just what exactly you are talking about, because I'm getting confused.

 

I know we're talking about Charges. But are you referencing the "Charges never recover" option, or the "Recover under limited circumstance" option or the "extra time to recover" option????? Or some combination of the last two?

 

THIS IS A QUOTE. I HAVE POSTED MORE THAN THE ALLOWED NUMBER OF BLOCKS OF QUOTED TEXT SO HAVE TO RESORT TO MARKING SOME THIS WAY

should not the Potion re-brewing, Gadgeteer recreating / tinkering / replacing the power source extra time, and the Priest prayer time / offerings, all get the -2 Limitation? I don't get it.

 

Thanks! DC

END QUOTE

 

Whether they get the same Limitations depends on whether the powers in question are going to work in play the same way. Like the old example goes, you can get a big Limitation for a power usable only in intense magnetic fields.....unless you have another power that generates intense magnetic fields.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary asks why such a rule was necessary and notes that it's annoying. The rule about quotes, that is, not the rules about charges.

[DasBroot]

In my experience it's not 'Charges that don't recover normally (though 'never recover' will indeed lose you points forever, even in a vpp, as the wise palindromedary pointed out) that gives GMs the heebie jeebies - it's charges that do not recover on Universal focuses (giving the fighter a 1 non-recoverable charge inobvious accessible universal focus healing potion, for example).

 

A gadgeteer *could* do the same thing with a universal focus gun but he's not as conceptually likely to share his toys (and thus is less likely to take 'universal' since it's not worth any additional limitation - his mega-ultra-hero-beam rifle is keyed to his bio-signs and can't be used if taken away).

 

A potion brewer is conceptually more likely to pass the potions around (and by making them universal foci is completely bypassing the powerful and expensive Usable On Others advantage at the small risk of an enemy grabbing away a potion from his belt in combat and quaffing it themselves).

[iamlibertarian]

 

Well,

 

 

I haven't noticed such a tendency, but if there is one, it seems explicable in terms of the fact that a Gadgeteer created GADGETS - things that can be broken or taken away. "magic" as a special effect may be seen as very general and unlimited and "do anything" in a way that other special effects don't match.

 

 

If I thought in superhero terms, I'd run a superhero game. I run a fantasy game because I think in fantasy terms. But I'll try.

 

 

Some would. Some have a problem with Gods, or with having Gods that hand out powers to their favorites like candy canes.

 

 

I find it hard to believe no one has a problem with this. "absorbs natural energy from the surrounding world?" Plugging into wall socket's not convenient enough for you?

 

 

Okay I just NOW noticed you're putting all these into a Variable Power Pool. Now, some people might have an issue with this depending on how the Pool changes. If you exhaust the charges in the gun, can you switch those points into some other gadget now that has no charges, or has charges that haven't been expended - maybe even a slightly different gun with different Advantages?

 

 

 

See above for potential uncool problems.

 

 

IF it is in fact the case that the priest and gadgeteer "never have to go home and perform a task" then you may have a point. But I see that as a big if. I expect priests to have to, if not necessarily "go home" still perform prayer and ritual on a daily basis to maintain their potent connection to the Source from which their Blessings Flow. I expect gadgeteers have to put in time on maintenance, plug things into some power source to recharge, etc.

 

 

 

I don't see a problem here other than those already mentioned, except that the more you Limit a Power, the less you pay for it, and may be seen as getting "more bang for your buck." Which is true, until the bang runs out and then you're bangless for a time.

 

 

THIS IS A QUOTE. I HAVE POSTED MORE THAN THE ALLOWED NUMBER OF BLOCKS OF QUOTED TEXT SO HAVE TO RESORT TO MARKING SOME THIS WAY

1) What is it about the Potion or Magic that bothers people/GMs so much but not the Gadgeteer or Priest? END QUOTE

 

IF (another big if) your premise is even correct that magic is regarded as more problematic, I'd guess it is that the gadgeteer has obvious restrictions built into their special effect, the priest has a God to answer to, and the mage is seen as more totally unrestricted.

 

 

THIS IS A QUOTE. I HAVE POSTED MORE THAN THE ALLOWED NUMBER OF BLOCKS OF QUOTED TEXT SO HAVE TO RESORT TO MARKING SOME THIS WAY

2) Now compare it to a Scroll with writing which disappears after use (6E 372). Those charges never recover, but somebody created that scroll. You get a -2 Limitation for that.END QUOTE

 

Okay, my answers above have been assuming that when you say "don't automatically recover" you're NOT referring to "Do not recover" but to "Recovers under limited circumstance." This would change my answer.

 

THIS IS A QUOTE. I HAVE POSTED MORE THAN THE ALLOWED NUMBER OF BLOCKS OF QUOTED TEXT SO HAVE TO RESORT TO MARKING SOME THIS WAY

But *somebody* had to write that scroll. So I assume it should be ok for the character to be the one to re-write it, again taking prep time and casting/writing efforts, just as in the last 3 cases above. But some GMs have a problem with that, as if they think doing so unbalances the game in ways that the Priest and Gadgeteer do not?END QUOTE

 

Yep, that's a problem. And if you think it's NOT a problem for a priest or gadgeteer or anyone else with a Variable Power Pool, I suspect that you are sadly mistaken. This would ALWAYS be a problem.

 

The problem is that if you put points from your Pool into a Power with Charges that never Recover, and use the Charges, those points are GONE.

 

Repeat, GONE. You can't put them into another spell or gadget or miracle. They're expended because you decided to make them expendable. Sure you got a hefty Limitation and a temporary big (perhaps unbalancing) boost to your power, but your character is now in the long term crippled by having invested points permanently in something that will never again give them any returns on that investment.

 

THIS IS A QUOTE. I HAVE POSTED MORE THAN THE ALLOWED NUMBER OF BLOCKS OF QUOTED TEXT SO HAVE TO RESORT TO MARKING SOME THIS WAY3) If the Scroll re-writing / re-casting / extra time to create efforts are worth a -2 Limitation, END QUOE=TE

 

I think you may need to be more specific about just what exactly you are talking about, because I'm getting confused.

 

I know we're talking about Charges. But are you referencing the "Charges never recover" option, or the "Recover under limited circumstance" option or the "extra time to recover" option????? Or some combination of the last two?

 

THIS IS A QUOTE. I HAVE POSTED MORE THAN THE ALLOWED NUMBER OF BLOCKS OF QUOTED TEXT SO HAVE TO RESORT TO MARKING SOME THIS WAY

should not the Potion re-brewing, Gadgeteer recreating / tinkering / replacing the power source extra time, and the Priest prayer time / offerings, all get the -2 Limitation? I don't get it.

 

Thanks! DC

END QUOTE

 

Whether they get the same Limitations depends on whether the powers in question are going to work in play the same way. Like the old example goes, you can get a big Limitation for a power usable only in intense magnetic fields.....unless you have another power that generates intense magnetic fields.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary asks why such a rule was necessary and notes that it's annoying. The rule about quotes, that is, not the rules about charges.

Thanks! I have lots to absorb, but to respond to some of it right away:

 

*If* (lol) you think in terms of D&D, priests pray for a relative few minutes a day and get their spells back right away. It is a -semi- common thread in fantasy in some like manner this happens, even if we don't all run it that way in a game.

 

Gadgeteers make gadgets which can be taken away, yet. Potions can be taken away in the same manner, so should have the same limitation Mechanics for the same limitation Values, imho.

 

Versatility of Magic VPPs compared to versatility of Gadget VPPs. The Gadgeteers I have played with are often more imaginative that the Mages I have played with, lol. They tend to get even more creative and versatile than the Mage players. But this is just My experience.

 

Plugging into a wall socket for charging: I was only comparing the mechanics of different types of characters. Priest whose spells just Mystically reappear the next day, vs having gadgets which must be charged in a wall socket, vs a full re-brewing/casting of a magical potion: None is better or worse than the other, but the more limiting (more effort/time), is already handled by the system by costing fewer Real points for putting in more effort. Naturally recharging Priest spells, vs Gadgeteer having to plug in at a specific location, vs. Mage having to spend time/effort/materials to brew a potion, with the Potion being more limiting and therefor less expensive.

 

As for VPP and switching, example Gadgeteer switching to a different gun with remaining charges: The easier you can switch powers, the easier you can switch, either the cost is significantly greater (leaving fewer points to spend elsewhere on your character) or the max level of the powers is significantly decreased (less to spend on Control Cost), again creating balance. But I can see where such would Not be appropriate for a Fantasy game but is common in a Supers game. A character buying a "Spell" as a separate power with Variable Advantage can afford to build said power with a higher, well, lets use DC for this example, than can a character with a Multipower, and a Multipower more than one who builds a VPP with its Control Cost being even more expensive. VPPs allow for more flexibility, but at a higher cost and lower max DC than a stand alone power. That brings balance in my mind. 

 

Example: Bruiser the Brick spends almost all of his power in STR and related advantages, and can maybe afford a 20D6 punch with the usual armor penetrating advantages, and high PD/ED resistant protection. But Gil Gadgetmaker with a gadget Multipower can afford only a 15D6 Blast and medium level PD/ED force field, but can also see through walls and detect/target some things with Radar, and has a cool car with special abilities. A little more flexible but with less max power than the Brick. Compared to Max the Mystic and his VPP, The VPP can only hold a 10D6 Magic Blast and lower PD/ED, but can have much greater flexibility than the Brick, but have many more lower powered things Max can do.

 

Even then, it depends on the Type of game you are looking to play/run. Even Fantasy has a huge difference, if you compare High Fantasy to Low Fantasy, and Heroic Supers to Superheroic. I would expect a Doctor Strange to be able to do just about anything, including clever ways to either get away from say, a Thor type or to trip up or confound a Hulk type. But if Thor ever did manage to get a full-powered hit on Doctor Strange, the good Doctor would be a red mush after just one hit. And if Doctor Strange got one of his ED Blasts off on Hulk, Hulk would just shrug it off (and get more angry, lol). It all seems very balancing to me.

 

Charges which never recover vs recover in limited circumstances (Restricted Recovery): (6E 372) Picking up a knife after a battle (out of combat) but only takes a few seconds or minutes to recover and can be ready for the next battle. More expensive but more flexible. Never recover, "a Charge might be

broken or lost, in which case it must be recreated like normal Charges." Such as a scroll with charges that disappear completely and must be fully recast/re-written. Or a potion which is now completely gone, and has to be re-brewed. Again, to me, the costs of each are a sufficiently balancing factor. I do have a problem however, with how some GMs (and the examples in the rule books) treat Potions vs Scrolls. The typical -1/4 to re-brew a potion is often treated as, 'you must take 6 hours and expensive materials' to re-brew a potion, whereas gadgets, you can just plug them in and they recover while you sleep. 

 

You: " your premise is even correct that magic is regarded as more problematic, I'd guess it is that the gadgeteer has obvious restrictions built into their special effect, the priest has a God to answer to, and the mage is seen as more totally unrestricted." Gadgets with more restrictions built in cost less so can be more powerful. The limiting God limits circumstances under which a power can be used but doesn't necessarily limit the power level, the costs can be more or less expensive depending on how the God sets the limits, but again costs balance that out. The mage is less restricted on how things can be done and how many types of things can be done, but typically at lower power levels (because of costs) and at greater cost as the max power levels reach that of the Priest or Gadgeteer. It all seems very balanced to me, so I don't understand the idea of mages being more problematic which at least *I* have experienced.

 

Again, I see the Mage VPP that can provide 10D6 in 20 things, compared to a Gadgeteer with a Gadget Multipower can provide 15D6 in only 10 things, compared to a individual powers character without Framework who can provide 20D6 in 5 things is not 'problematic'. Its just flavor. So I do not get the fear or dislike of mages with VPPs that *I* have experienced.

 

Since I asked a lot of question of you, let me ask another question of you, or at least in a different way for clarification.  -1/4 limitation for having to re-brew a potion vs a gadget you just have to plug in while you sleep to regain charges +0 limitation vs priest regularly keeping up devotion/prayers and charges mystically recharge at dawn +0. If a character did not take the -1/4 limitation on potions (making it more expensive), would a reasonable comparison to the priest and the gadgeteer be to, say, have an ever cooking cauldron which makes the potion overnight while the Mage sleeps, and the mage just scoops some up in a vial the next morning? Or a scroll (without the non-recoverable charges option) mystically re-write itself overnight (or the house demon re-writes it for him, or the like)?

 

Thank you so much for your time and your thoughts. It is helping me to think/re-think/clarify my own thoughts!

DC

[Chris Goodwin]

The basic Charges Modifier assumes that your character has some way to get more of them.  You can pick up more clips for your blaster back at base, or you can refill your potion bottles at a local potion brewer.  It also assumes that there might be times when you're not able to get them recovered, but that's counterbalanced by times when you might be able to replenish them at will.  

 

Common sense, dramatic sense, and special effects should prevail.  A potion bottle with three Charges of a healing potion might be built to recover under moderately rare circumstances, but if one of your party members is an alchemist who hands out healing potions for free then you don't get to take that "rare circumstances" modifier.  

 

If you're talking about the Charges modifier, Charges Never Recover, that's the sort of thing that IMO breaks the relationship between points and what they are supposed to represent.  Charges with that Modifier mean Charges that don't, ever, recover, and the way it's supposed to work is that once they're gone, they're gone forever, and you lose the points you've paid.  (Or, rather, you've got points spent on a Power with Charges that Never Recover, and they just sit there, doing nothing.)  A lot of GMs, and I'm one of them, are a bit hinky at the idea of things that you can buy that result in points going away.  I'm more likely to use them in a magic item that fantasy characters might find, for which I'm not going to charge them points to keep and use, but that is eventually going to just stop working.  I'm not sure where the idea of Magic Pool vs. Gadget Pool enters into it.  I don't think there's anything inherent about either one that requires Charges that recover or Charges that Never Recover; you could do the latter just as easily with a Gadget Pool as the former with a Magic Pool.  

 

But there is a line, and it's a pretty wide one, between "item that has Charges that recover under a particular set of circumstances that the PCs may or may not be able to replicate" and "item that has Charges that Never Recover (-2)".  

[Chris Goodwin]

I thought I might follow up on this a bit more.
 

Alchemist who creates a Potion of STR with Time Limit with charges which DO recover. Should not the vials just mystically refill overnight, without the 're-brewing process'? To mollify the GM, the equivalent might be to have a cauldron at home continuously bubbling away. Next day more of the potion is ready to be scooped up into a vial without another lick of effort. That is still more effort than the Priest or Gadgeteer have to go through, as they never have to "go home and perform a task" to recharge. Even with the 'going home and refilling the vial,' GMs already begin to get nervous, but not too much.

I have not a single problem with this description of how the potion replenishes.  I like the idea of having a cauldron bubbling away back at home that the character can return to and refill.    If it's more difficult to get to, if the character can't always just return home, then they get to take a Limitation, or reduce the Advantage, on the Charges that reflect that.  
 
 

Potion with charges which do NOT recover. Must go through lengthy re-cast / re-brew efforts, just like the Gadgeteer and Priest, but GMs start to get Very nervous and dislike it very much.

 

I have not a single problem with this as well, and I don't think I've encountered any GMs that would have a problem with this.  That's pretty much a standard way of replenishing a potion, and I can think of two or three ways I'd build that. 

[Lucius]

 

I'm sorry, I still find the way you express yourself to be very confusing. For example,

 

Charges which never recover vs recover in limited circumstances (Restricted Recovery): (6E 372)

You mention to kinds of charges here: The kind that never recover, and the kind that recover in limited circumstances. Then,

 

Picking up a knife after a battle (out of combat) but only takes a few seconds or minutes to recover and can be ready for the next battle. More expensive but more flexible.

you proceed to describe something that is NEITHER of the two kinds of charges you mentioned. This is an example of "Recoverable" charges.

 

Never recover, "a Charge might be

broken or lost, in which case it must be recreated like normal Charges." Such as a scroll with charges that disappear completely and must be fully recast/re-written.

I'm going to have to say no, no, no, NO. UNLESS by "fully recast/re-written" you mean "More Character Points are expended to recreate the power." If that's what you mean, you should say so. If it's not, then you are, I'm sorry, dead wrong in the above statement.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary is getting indigestion

[iamlibertarian]

I'm sorry, I still find the way you express yourself to be very confusing. For example,

 

 

You mention to kinds of charges here: The kind that never recover, and the kind that recover in limited circumstances. Then,

 

 

you proceed to describe something that is NEITHER of the two kinds of charges you mentioned. This is an example of "Recoverable" charges.

 

 

I'm going to have to say no, no, no, NO. UNLESS by "fully recast/re-written" you mean "More Character Points are expended to recreate the power." If that's what you mean, you should say so. If it's not, then you are, I'm sorry, dead wrong in the above statement.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

The palindromedary is getting indigestion

 

Thanks Lucius, I think you already answered that for me in a previous response, and that it is finally beginning to sink into my head through my thick skull, lol.