PS: Component Design

[Labrat]

Hey there,

 

I was just putting together a Wizard NPC and I thought of something that, with further thought, made for an interesting question to put to the boards or to the very hights of Mt Heropolis itself.

 

What would the implications be for having a PS in 'component making'? Would that decrease any penalties for 'Difficult to Obtain' so that it's only material-biased? Sure you might need some finely crafted crystal, but as long as you bought the crystal you could 'finely craft' it yourself... or does this commom limitation assume that the Wizard makes his own components?

 

Surely I can't be the first one to think of this, so if this is a repeat then I'll settle for a point in the right direction of previous discussion.

[Outsider]

Re: PS: Component Design

 

I don't think I would allow a PS "Component Making" as described on the grounds that the skills needed to make 'components' are far too varied to be included under a single profession. One spell might need finely crafted crystal, the next a sturdy sword, the one after that a rune embroidered silken kerchief, and so on. Since the skills needed to make each of these items are entirely different, allowing them (and the so on) all to be made by the application of a single PS would effectively make that PS into "PS : Everything"

 

My interpretation has always been that a wizard usually has to go to a master craftsman (or at least a journeyman) for any 'finely crafted' components that he might need. There is nothing to keep a wizard from learning a profession and crafting his own, but it would have to be profession by profession.

 

Since a wizard would normally prefer (or be required to) spend a great deal of his 'free time' studying wizardry, it is far more likely that he will form a professional relationship with various craftsmen and then stockpile components. Professional craftsmen would -love- to have such a professional relationship because it will give them something to work on whenever they dont have other orders.

[nelay]

Re: PS: Component Design

 

I have had issues with mages taking a spell to create the focus required for a different spell via transform. To combat it, I use the following house rule:

 

Focus Expendability is as follows:

A Focus is considered Easy to obtain if it is generally simple to find, can be made by unskilled labor, is very inexpensive (2cp in value) or if it takes the character at least 30 minutes to craft the focus. This is worth an additional -0 limitation.

A Focus is considered Difficult to obtain if it is slightly rare, can be manufactured by skilled labor, involves some danger in acquiring or possessing it, is reasonably valuable (10sp in value) or if it takes the the character at least 5 hours to craft the focus. This is worth an additional -1/4 limitation.

A Focus is considered Very Difficult to obtain if it is rare, can be manufactured by very skilled labor (base roll + 4), involves danger in acquiring or possessing it, is valuable (100sp in value) or if it takes the character at least 1 day to craft the focus. This is worth an additional -1/2 limitation.

A Focus is considered Extremely Difficult to obtain if it is very rare, can be manufactured by master level labor (base roll +8), involves great danger in acquiring or possessing it, is very valuable (1000sp in value) or if takes the character in at least 1 week to craft the focus. This is worth an additional -1 limitation.

NOTE: If a character possesses the ability to create the item required for a focus, use cost of the material needed and/or the time needed to craft the focus to determine the Focus Expendability. Players may not buy low cost skills, talents or powers to in order to take advantage of a cost savings for all other spells. A character buying the ability to create his/her own foci, simply makes it easier to replenish any supply needed and should not result in a large cost savings for the player.

For example, a character with a spell requiring an expendable master work carved wand would not be able to take the Extremely Difficult level of expendability if the character possessed a skill roll for carving of 19 + (Master level). In this example, the GM would compare the material cost to the time required to carve the wand and the player would base the limitation on the greater of the two.

[Labrat]

Re: PS: Component Design

 

Thanks for your answers, guys. I would think that any required 'KS' in a school of magic would allow knowledge of how to obtain these components if the caster can't make them him/herself. How much would the PS: Component Design cost? Would it be allowable for the caster's 'primary' school of magic? I don't see this as too abusive seeing how there were CPs spent for the use of such spells. It would still take time, the right tools and money, though.

 

Should it be considered as part of the KS: Magic College? On one hand I'd think this would be reasonable knowledge for one who spent so much time studying the arts that rely on them. I could go either way though, seeing the clear probability of abuse inherent in it.

 

I'm also getting ideas that this would make a cool campaign. The PCs are component merchants, or gophers for a component merchant that are constantly spanning the globe looking for raw materials, transporting component crafts, and looking for better resources to use... hmmm...

[CourtFool]

PS: Competent Design

 

I would be very leary of allowing it as it is, at least partially, circumventing a Limitation.

 

That being said, if you are hell bent on allowing it I would make a new skill with categories. 2 pts for the base skill which includes one category and then 1 pt per additional category. Categories could be like metal components, wood components, animal components, ect.

[Labrat]

Re: PS: Competent Design

 

I would be very leary of allowing it as it is, at least partially, circumventing a Limitation.

 

That being said, if you are hell bent on allowing it I would make a new skill with categories. 2 pts for the base skill which includes one category and then 1 pt per additional category. Categories could be like metal components, wood components, animal components, ect.

 

Well that's kind of my point. If it were allowed (barring all munchkinism and looking to the practicality of how a real spell-caster would align his skills), how would it affect the Focus limitations of spell write-ups? I would agree that not every player could be trusted with this, but if one could then I think that it might be considered as a realistic skill for wizard types to have. I'm not really sold on the idea of allowing it for PCs, NPCs sure, and if it was used I fully agree that sub-sections of the KS would be necessary as you described.

 

I'm surprised that this hasn't been discussed before, frankly, so thanks for your input!

[CourtFool]

Re: PS: Competent Design

 

I'm surprised that this hasn't been discussed before' date=' frankly, so thanks for your input![/quote']

 

Ha! That is two people that have thanked me publicly. It is an epidemic!

 

I hope I did not sound like I was saying you were wrong for wanting to add this, simply that I disagreed. How would it affect Foci? I think I would agree with nelay and say it would make it Difficult to Obtain -¼.

[Black Rose]

Re: PS: Component Design

 

What would the implications be for having a PS in 'component making'? Would that decrease any penalties for 'Difficult to Obtain' so that it's only material-biased? Sure you might need some finely crafted crystal' date=' but as long as you bought the crystal you could 'finely craft' it yourself... or does this commom limitation assume that the Wizard makes his own components?[/quote']

 

I think it would depend on the material components. If you're going for the quasi-scientific Law of Similarity/Law of Contagion way of doing material components, then the sheer number of different components would be too great for a single skill, IMO

 

Although.... Depending on how you're doing spells -- straight powers or some framework -- I could see your KS: Spell School skills being usable as a complementary roll to whatever craft skill you need. Also, provided you have enough points to throw around for something like this, I'd say each school of magic (if you're doing magic like this) would "require" three skills: a KS: Spell School to cover the school itself (and to add to Inventor rolls for spell creation and tweaking), a KS covering various "mundane" elements of the college, and a third KS covering components and enchanted item creation purely from that school (I like the idea of temporary magic items, like a charged light stone or a rune-painted shield; the item is left, but the spell is gone afterward).

 

I think, in order for us to help you more, you're gonna have to tell us what your magic system is like.

[Labrat]

Re: PS: Component Design

 

I've taken to using the unmodified Turakian Age approach, good, bad or indifferent. So basically Magic Powers are based on a RP/3 cost structure and there's generally a Magic Skill Roll requirement involved. Different colleges require separate purchase of the proper (Power) Magic Skill, Elementalism, Wizardry, Druidry, etc... to use a Spell from a given college you have to have the appropriate Power Skill associated with it.

 

This is why skill modifiers may work as you proposed, Black Rose, and that is also why knowledge of how to make the spell components may at least be at a FAM level provided that the proper craftwork/artisan skills are also known.

 

An additional point that I wanted to add now that I'm thinking of it is this, if you were really a wizard-type who happened to be a good artisan with, say, woodcarving, would it be practical to assume that you would prefer spells that had a wood-art type of component? Not for nothing, but I think that I would. I'm just throwing that out there as a 'hmm' point. Granted maybe not a lot of spells use components that require finely crafted woodwork, but it may help sometimes.

 

All this being said, these limited circumstances may very well justify a 'PS: Wood-based Component Craftsman' skill purchase with minimal chance of abuse or game-play imbalance.

 

Just throwing some thoughts out there.

 

Oh, and good point on the proper use of the Inventor/Spell Research roll, BR. I think that this may have more to say on the PS: Component Engineer than any seeings how the egg (component) must be there for the chicken (spell) to manifest in the first place... another 'hmm' point well received.