Should we call it vigorously agreeing? 
There are multiple ways to get to CS+Penetration of 40. There are fewer ways to get to 55.
If the goal is to achieve good penetration, there are some other virtues that can help boost the casting total (each adding +3):
- Cyclic Magic
- Method Caster
- Special Circumstances
The Penetration spell mastery specialty can also give a nice boost, by adding the mastery score to the Penetration ability. Which gets multiplied if you happen to have an arcane connection. So you can add Flawless Magic and Mastered Spells to it.
Note the other stuff I say after that. It isn't about being the best so much as being awesome rather than pretty good.
Sure, I agree with that. If your character does something, he should, generally, begin play being able to do that thing in a capable way.
I think Erik Tyrrell shows that it is perfectly possible to have a reasonable starting character that hits a criteria like this (or thereabouts) without needing the typical "specialisation" virtues. It's just a different character.
Obviously, taking the "specialisation" Virtues is a strong way (and easy way) to build a specialist character. But you can pretty clearly do something similar just by sinking XP into the relevant areas; saving the Virtue slot for something else.
I don't think he shows this.
Newbie filius Ken, follower of Flambeau:
Sta 3
4 (Pu+Af)*(Cr+Ig)
1 Minor Focus: Creating Fire
1 Strong Parens
1 Baccalaureate
etc.
75 Latin 5
15 AL 2
30 Magic Theory 3
05 Parma 1
05 OoH Lore 1
05 OoH Law 1
Which leaves 255xp for
115xp-->173xp Cr 18+3
115xp-->173xp Ig 18+3
.. and for a touch of Mastery.
Getting rid of Baccalaureate or Good Parens is possible, leaving Arts at 16 or 17.
So we have a casting total of d10+modifiers+3+21+21+21+2(dramatic yelling and gesticulating) = 68+stuff
That Pilum is going to penetrate Seferiel in a magic Aura (48+stuff iirc)! Most Faeries will be crisped by his BoAF.
As for fatigue.... what's that?
The other guy without virtues of this kind can start off casting a BoAF, often taking fatigue. His Pilum cannot consistently penetrate 20 Might. He is good with fire, sure, but isn't a real hottie.
Sometimes quantity has a quality all its own.
Anyway,
Ken
And this is a bit on the extreme side, IMO.
I don't see why it's a big deal. Sure, a magus gets a whole lot more out of being a specialist in general than being a generalist in general, but neither extreme is good if it's all-inclusive. When I play generalists, I don't put a three in every Art, even if that's the most "general" option possible; being a generalist is about having access to a broad range of useful magic, so if all of a TeFo's value is being replicated by the other TeFo combinations I have a bit higher, there's no point lowering those to get a higher score in the essentially useless other combination, and no reason to get high scores if a higher score in something else covers both areas. For example, if I've got a good score in CrIg, then I won't neglect CrAu, but I also don't need to worry about it getting strong enough for combat. So a generalist will tend to have more fives and sevens and leave a few Arts out than just have every Art at the most even possible amount, if they were trained intelligently.
Likewise, while it's nice having good scores as a specialist, I generally see it as more favorable to have, oh, a 13-15+3 in your two Arts of choice and then a few threes and fives strewn throughout your other scores. Because while from a PC-in-a-troupe perspective, your SG might very well throw nothing at you but challenges that you can overcome by ashing them, you have no guarantee that such lenience will be in place, and more importantly your character's magus, unless their parens was deranged (I will admit that such a prospect is more possible in Ars Magica than most games) or just didn't care (gosh darn it Ars Magica, stop making all my exceptions true) is going to (want to) have a wider variety of Art skills so that they aren't completely useless (possibly resulting in their deaths) the second their TeFo of choice can't feasibly be used to solve the situation.
So if you're a few points below your uber-specialized sodales but you've got more options, you're not as bad off as you might think. Just don't challenge the one with the Virtues to certamen.
What exactly is the subject of discussion here? I'm not at all sure what points folks are trying to make.
Newbie filius Thunderous, follower of Flambeau in Cult of Mercury
Sta +3
Gild Training [1]
Minor Magical Focus: Lightning [free]
Strong Faerie Blood: Zeus/Jupiter (Lightning) [3]
Strong Parens [1]
Covenant Upbringing [-1]
From before apprenticeship:
Concentration 1
Faerie Sympathy: Lightning 6
Living Language: Latin 5
Second Sight 4
From apprenticeship:
Artes Liberales 1 [5]
Code of Hermes 1 [5]
Magic Theory 3 [30]
Penetration 1 [5]
Org. Lore: OoH 1 [5]
Parma Magica 1 [5]
Creo 15 [120]
Auram 15 [120]
Spell Mastery 4 (Adaptive Casting, Multiple Casting, Penetration, and one more)
... and a few more points
How's this in comparison to Ken?
- One of Ken's Virtues was also free, so Ken spent 6 points while Thunderous spent 5. That leaves Thunderous 1 more point to play around with.
- Both of them can start off knowing level-50 CrFo spells of their chosen type, and past level 50 it doesn't matter for such combat spells.
- Ken has a penetration of 68-level+stuff for fire attack spells, while Thunderous has a penetration of 61-level+stuff for his lightning attack spells of which he can launch 5 in a single round. So it's a trade-off of 7 points of penetration for some multiple casting - seems pretty balanced.
- With the same relative age (adjusting 15 years for Strong Faerie Blood), they have about the same experience remaining.
- Thunderous has a Second Sight score of 4 and can see in the dark.
- Ken is better at other Creo or Ignem spells than Thunderous is at other Creo or Auram spells by about 1 magnitude.
- Auram vs. Ignem doesn't really matter. I only selected Auram because I remembered the Zeus part in TSE. Thunderous could easily be altered to use Ignem.
So, with only one of the standard five Virtues (2 Affinity, 2 Puissant, and Focus), I would say I have created as good a specialist as you have. There are some trade-offs. Thunderous has his Second Sight and an extra Virtue point versus Ken's superior half-off-Art scores. Thunderous has a little lower (but still excellent) Penetration than Ken but can pump out more copies of his attack spells. These seem pretty balanced. They're both extreme. I just wanted to show that we don't need to get locked into the 2 Affinity, 2 Puissant, and Focus idea for an excellent specialist.
No one has apparently refuted my points that Ken's example and callen's example are on the extreme side. And speaking to Erik's question, this wasn't the point of the OP, at all. I don't think anyone questions that you can create a specialist that has tremendous casting scores, lab totals and penetration at gauntlet. As callen's example illustrates, it's almost a trivial exercise. Going back to the OP, the question was: is a concept which doesn't take full advantage of Puissant and affinities gimped?
In short, my opinion is no, such a character is not gimped, they are probably a bit more generalized than some of the over-specialized monstrosities that callen and Ovarwa have posted, but I don't think it's a bad thing. Even my specialists have 1 or 2 other Arts that have decent or "reasonable" scores.
Yes. And the follow-up message I wanted to write and couldn't until now is:
Could we know the specifics of the build described in the OP? Or was it a general question. I think I showed pretty well that avoiding Puissant/Affinity does not necessarily gimp even a specialist. But, as Jonathan pointed out and I had stated, these are overly specialized characters. The reason I ask about the OP build is that I find it best to build around what will reasonably fit such a build. Why try to make an Ignem specialist with Deficient Ignem, for example?
It was actually a general question, though the character I was thinking of when I posed the question was based on an idea somebody mentioned from my very first thread on these boards. Basically, it was a character who had a combination of Virtues and magic specialization so as to come off in every way not as a magician but merely the luckiest human alive (or, perhaps, as a magician of luck; it's not like people who understand Hermetic magic will believe either story). This includes, along with the obvious Luck Virtue, numerous other Virtues relating to things that appear lucky to the untrained observer. Of course, the best tool in any wizard's repertoire is their magic, and this character would be specializing in ReMe or ReVi to control invisible creatures into arranging what appear to be incredibly lucky coincidences for the magus' benefit (and if ReMe is the choice, strengthening peoples' or creatures' belief in the idea that it is simply incredible luck would be helpful as well). Such a character would still want to be rather strong in their specialty, but since they're already using numerous Virtues alongside their magic to fulfill the concept... A relevant Minor Focus might be an option, but four or five Virtues strictly for the magic would be entirely out of the question.
Of course, that was just a thought, not the entire reason for the posting of the thread. I was really just curious for people's opinions on this so I could keep it in mind while making future characters.
Oh, I agree this is a good one. I love SFB. My favorite virtue, which I talk about all too often here. I didn't go this route (or add a correspondence+mastery to the usual, for double the pleasure, and I was sorely tempted) because some people on this thread don't believe Sympathy applies to Mastery. (Naturally, I'm not one of them 
. I believe that FS applies to Mastery, to Penetration twice if the mastery ability is chosen, and to Philosophy and AL for rituals/ceremonies.) The only problem with my specialist is that he's too good. Your specialist is also "too good." Both have the Technique and Form Monstrosity virtues!
I would note, however, that you have also spent virtue points to make your specialty shine, though not the same ones. The OP wanted to know if a specialist that just invests points in Arts is in the same league as one who also has specialist virtues.
Finally, only certain kinds of specialist benefit from the TeFo+Focus package. The 6pt package of (Gentle Gift, Silent and Subtle) has also invested many vps into his specialty, for example, toward a useful but very different kind of specialty.
Anyway,
Ken
Well, a character could readily come across as a very lucky magus. A major Heroic Virtue provides the normal Luck virtue and also lets you spend confidence to reroll, before botch dice are rolled. Intuition is also a great virtue for this. There's a major faerie virtue for the pretty people, that causes faeries to create good coincidences for you to be a part of your story and that even lets you write your own coincidence every now and then; this one requires a very cooperative GM. Self-Confident gives you a score of 2; if you just relabel "Confidence Points" as "Luck Points" you have even more luck. Silent+Subtle makes it very difficult for anyone to realize that you are even doing anything, as weird and fortunate things happen around you. (PeTe a pit --> "isn't it lucky that a sinkhole appeared beneath those charging knights?")
Mr. Lucky.
Anyway,
Ken
Of course, if you want people to acknowledge you as a specialist, then invest in Good Teacher and enhance the heck out of your books. The chump with the -1 Com who's spent all his XP on his Arts might be able to blow stuff up real good, but nobody's going to be reading his books.
I only added it to Magic Theory and Penetration. I didn't add it to Spell Mastery to avoid that controversy. That would have given 6 more copies with 6 more penetration.