Learn from Mistakes is probably the worst one.
Yes, that's my point. Spell Mastery is not worth the bother for every spell, and not all the options make sense with every spell. On the other hand, there are some spells that are massively enhanced by the investment. Because it is optional at every level, you can choose for each spell individually.
Since I'm fairly sure in my saga the amount of experience not from virtues that has been spent on masteries is a round number (specifically 0), I'm going to carry right on being doubtful about this.
Well, if you think Mastery is underpowered, you could have it bought as an Art rather than an Ability. But I don't think we can make that sort of change in errata…
If Mastery were really so weak, people wouldn’t consider Flawless Magic to be one of the best Major Hermetic Virtues.
Sure, this one option isn’t any good if you don’t get to 5, but when you do advance from 4 to 5, it seems like a much stronger choice than most. That would make it more limited, but not a weak option.
2 Likes
Another clarification about FFM: What about target material? If a ReTe spell is changed to affect metal instead of stone, does that qualify as a one-step adjustment within the same Target, as with size? Or, on the other hand, is material adjustment a change to the effect, and so not allowed by FFM?
I'm inclined to leave that to troupe discretion. I can see arguments either way, and I am not convinced it is important enough to specify in the rules. A troupe with a FFM Terram specialist is going to need to decide, though.
1 Like
In my saga I would say no. It is the basis of the effect, not "just" some parameters. We can say it is in the Base part of the spell design.
5 Likes
Hah! My troupe considers it one of the best ones 
My current character has Flawless Magic and has built up a huge list over the closing on 7 years of play. For Formulaic Spells, Fast Casting seems to be his most common. A little surprising at first, but thinking about it that has saved him many times since he can use them to counter spells without using Spontaneous.
For Rituals he is not a good source for the published Mastery Abilities since his two most common are Efficient Casting and Soft Magic, both of which are not published (we use a rather large list that is detailed in my HR thread). Ignoring (our modified version of) Adaptive, Rebuttel and Stalwart tie for a distant third.
1 Like
The dual primary effects of mastery, increasing casting total and reducing botch dice, make its effect less likely so unless you have a character with Unpredictable Magic flaw or houserule it to happen on the first zero or something then it’s pretty pointless mechanically.
Edit: personally I think Learn from Mistakes being a general rule would be good though 5xp may be a bit much in that case.
Explain? I can't see much use for it unless you regularly multicast in high hostile aura regio? How often do you botch your mastered spell?
Sure, but then you'll have to explain why you think it's the worst
Oh, no. You do not want to botch. You never want to botch, that's the main benefit of having mastery! You want to occasionally fail by exactly one point (when it's without too serious consequences) without botching.
My munchkin troupe always shows incredible creativity at engineering situations where casting a given spell is undeniably "natural"; there is a small probability that the roll will fail by exactly one point (but no probability of a botch); and if it does fail it does so without serious consequences. Learn from Mistakes is typically taken as one's first Mastery. Two game sessions and now Mastery is at 2 "for free". Three more sessions, and it's at 3...
Simple
- Spell Mastery means you rarely botch;
- If you're inventing a spell in your main arts, you have to stack a lot of lab bonus to invent a spell that you can't reliably cast, or a lot of seasons, or you have to rely on high level lab text. On the other hand, while low level spells can be researched easily with lab texts in neglected arts... typically arts are neglected for a reason or you'll read a primer and they won't be neglected long, the high level ones are those I use least often (because warp and because i rarely develop a hobby for communing with every rock or blowing up every castle), therefore few spells will fail outside a negative aura, all things being equal. Doubly true because the more you master your spell, the easier it becomes.
- I try to avoid botching. When I do, it's an accident.
- Unlike your troupe does, I cast when its needed, I don't seek to direct the story in a direction that lets me use my spell so I can fail it. I don't go take a stroll through town or make bets I can do this with my hands tied to get a penalty casting my spell hoping to earn xp.
Therefore except for spells I anticipate to cast very often in stressed high hostile aura situation - often enough that I expect to roll several botches, I very often don't expect to earn back 5 xp with it and would rather take something that is useful.
3 Likes
If you take this you must want to get a lot more Mastery in it, otherwise you wasted a choice. But getting a lot more Mastery drastically reduces the chance of botching, plus you have to earn that much more from the option to make up for having not used the option on what you want now. So this option is pretty much worthless for both low and high Mastery. The only time it works out well is if you can really control your rolls to make sure you fail by 1 often enough. But then there is the comment about it having to come up naturally, meaning you're not going to have to roll it often and you're going to have even less of a chance of failing by 1.
Only if you can manufacture such "natural" occurrences does this change. But if you're manufacturing it, is it really coming up naturally? Pretty much by definition it's not.
4 Likes
Not ... really? The way I see it is that if you take it as your first mastery ability, you are one mastery ability "behind" for two sessions. Then you are forever ahead (Mastery 2 with one "useless" ability obviously beats Mastery 1).
It's not difficult at all to be in a situation where you fail a non-botching stress roll exactly by 1 exactly 1 roll out of 10. Almost any situation in which you don't have guaranteed success, but still have a non-negligible chance of success qualifies.
I disagree. It comes up naturally in a manufactured story
Remember: a character's personality, goals etc. are all chosen by the player. My munchkin but clever troupe somehow manages to subtly steer their PCs in situations where the most natural action for their characters is to cast the spell, without guaranteed success or almost guaranteed failure - and in which failure is not a disaster anyway. What can I say, you haven't seen them.
SG: "So, you cast Pilum of Fire against the fleeing bandit ...Creo 10, Ignem 10+2, Stamina +1, mastery 1 = 24 + stress die. It's not particularly stressful, so mastery eliminates your single botch die. Your spell works automatically, and you do not even fatigue yourself".
Player: "Actually, no, Remember, I am cradling in the arms the child I just saved, rocking her gently. So the spell is cast without gestures..."
SG: "Ok, 24-5+stress die, vs. an ease factor of 20; roll: you get fatigued on a 0".
Player: "... and without voice. I am softly singing a lullaby to the child. A sweet sad lullaby."
SG: "Uhm, 24-15+stress die ... what?"
Player:"Yes, it seems that on a 0 I'll fail to cast the spell. By 1. I'll take the chance rather than startling the child. Should I fail, the bandit would still be in range for another try".
SG: "You know, rocking the child and singing a lullaby while casting a Pilum probably deserves another botch die..."
Player: "Really? I can't put the child at risk then. I'll stay absolutely still and silent for the few heartbeats it takes to cast the spell. On the lullaby's refrain, you know, like pop-singers at concerts?"
SG: "Sigh. Roll."
Player: "7 - Dammit!"
SG: "Uhm ... the bandit collapses, dead, in a heap of smouldering meat."
Player: "Can I be really sure? I mean, he could just be pretending, and I can't risk the child's safety, can I? Or maybe he's mortally wounded, alive but suffering terribly. I'm a compassionate maga: I'll cast a second Pilum as a coup de grace."
SG: "Let me guess: no voice, no gestures".
Player: "Of course, I can't risk startling the child, can I?"
Yeah/Nah.
SG: If you are committed to casting Pilum, remember, the spell comes from the palm of your hand. Thinking further, making sure the child doesn't get scorched, 2 extra botch dice.
Never let a rules rorting grognard, exploit the rules. At least that's my way of thinking.
I consider learn from mistakes is only cost effective if the Grognards are allowed free reign.
1 Like
Player: "Ah, but remember, we call it Pilum, but in fact you agreed it's actually a variant that shoots out of my maga's eyes!" (Besides, the player would be quick to point out that the Pilum originating at the maga's location is merely cosmetic - the fire is created at R:Voice - and so it should have no mechanical impact).
Maybe my example did not come through in the right way.
But what I am saying is that:
a) magi casting their favourite spells often is natural. Any SG who tries to adversarially prevent that creates a bad dynamic at the table. Any SG who tries to prevent that specifically for players/spells that might gain from a Learn from Mistakes creates an even worse dynamic.
b) players of magi have numerous bonuses and penalties that they can pile up on (or leave out of) a die roll, making a cogent argument about why it makes sense in a particular situation.
c) you don't have to control the bonuses exactly - you have an 8-point interval in which there is exactly 1 chance in 10 of failing by one.
I would not consider that "rule exploitation" any more than taking Affinity and Puissant in the Tech/Form combination your magus plans to develop. The way I see it is this: if a player invests enough creativity into subtly steering events so his magus gets to benefit from Learn from Mistakes often, that's a fair reward, and it becomes one of the best masteries of the game.
It is a fine line.
I honestly think Learn from Mistakes a poorly designed mastery. It's either going to happen so rarely, it's useless and the magi has wasted a mastery slot, or it triggers often enough Learn from Mistakes is nearly always the first mastery taken.
I'm not realistically suggesting an errata, as I consider it a bit too niche to spend time on, however, I'd think something like the following would be more balanced.
Any time a spell casting attempt fails, 1 XP is received. If a spell is botched, 5 XP are received. The XP gain can only happen once a season, and will always be the higher XP gain, not the first.
This would mean over time, learn from mistakes will pay for itself, however, it's at least 10 seasons (if no botches) where the magi is lacking a better mastery, so there is a cost.
3 Likes
Don't forget it gets more expensive. Let's say that Learn from Mistakes gives you 10 experience. You now need 15 more experience to get your 2nd other option, while the person who didn't take it only needs 10 experience to get the next option. And every option after that also costs 5 less without it. You only remain ahead if you can keep picking up experience from this, even as you reach higher Mastery scores.
Consider something where you want 6 other Mastery options and you have a Familiar. +1 to casting and an extra -1 botch die probably become nearly irrelevant. You need to gain 35 experience, so have this trigger 7 times in order to not fall behind. That's a lot more than triggering 2 times.
Oh, I know. There are lots of ways to adjust voice/gestures. You can use Confidence once in a while, too, to greatly improve your odds.
But all the rest shows you're operating in the roll-heavy-munchkin (I don't know many SG's who would qualify that gratuitous coup de grace, for example.) game you mentioned before. That just isn't most games. In two decades I haven't yet been in a game where I could roll 10 PoF in a single adventure, let alone session, except by just randomly blasting away. And don't forget, if you need to penetrate anything mildly significant, aiming for missing by 1 is basically saying you'll probably fail 10/10 times. If I failed 10/10 times with PoF when I need it, I'd probably have left multiple grogs dead, maybe even a more important character.
Even then, you're saying these players do the same with a whole bunch of spells? How many people have played in games where they cast a while pile of spells each 10 times per adventure? I've never seen that happen for any player in any game I've played in. And then there are the rituals, which are one of the main set of things you want to master. How many of your players aim to fail their rituals like this? How many times do these players actually get to cast each ritual in an adventure?
Still, I could see it with a particular spell or two. I think there are much better cases than PoF. But this is why I said there are worse options that are still worth taking.
Consider this and look again at what you're saying. Even for these roll-heavy-munchkins this is only worthwhile if they want to get a bunch of other options. So its value relies on the value of multiple others. If the others aren't good enough or they only want a couple, the value of this one also drops. It's also only useful in this way for the few spells they can manage to use a lot. It's also of no value to even them for rituals. And this limited use is for a group where there are tons of rolls and they are extremely permissive.
It would be interesting to count all that group's Mastery options to see what fraction are this. And then scale that down for groups that don't roll nearly so much and nearly so permissively.
Now, I didn't specify it as the only not generally great one. Apotropaic Mastery is probably useful on at most a couple spells for most magi. Even then most of them probably benefit more from Penetration and Multiple Casting, for example. But even as a generally weak one, it is gold for the right caster. Or look at Rebuttal. It's almost never useful for anyone, but if you cast Aegis of the Hearth, it's great. This is why even the not-so-great ones are still work taking at the appropriate times. Same thing with Flexible Casting. It isn't generally worthwhile, but in those few instances it's gold.
Personally, I think Goetic Mastery is the worst one. First you have to have one of these four (mostly Infernal) things to even use it. But if you have them as a Hermetic caster, it's not really worth improving them since you benefit so much more by improving Rego and Vim. So I even rarely find it at all worthwhile on even someone for whom it fits well. Even then, there are rare exceptions.
1 Like