Initial Enchanting with much larger Lab Total

Games Discussion Ars Magica
1

Just wondering how others handle the initial enchanting of a lesser device when the Magi has a much larger lab total. By "much larger" I mean 3x or more. My group breaks the season down and allows the Magi to use the just created Labtext from the first to create a second in the same season.

Example: If your Lab Total was 30 and you were creating something at Level of 10 without a Labtext, for the first one it would cost you 20. At that point you have one created and a labtext. With the last 10 points in your Lab Total you could create a second one in that same season.

Wondering if others play it this way, require 2x the Level for all created in the first season, or some other variation.

  • Full cost for first, reduced cost for others (Labtext takes effect after first)
  • Full cost for all (Labtext not usable in season it is created)
  • Some other system (Please explain in post)
0 voters
1 Like
2

We did it the same way, I think. First one is full price, each thereafter is half price.

3

Personally, I voted that full cost for all. Enchanting takes a whole season for each of the items, because in order to be stabilized it need to go through the astrological cycles, etc.

So with a higher lab total you are just enchanting several of them at once, so you don't have a lab text yet. You are not enchanting sequentially, but in parallel.

7 Likes
4

This is only true if you have the relevant mystery for astrological enchantments. Astrological labwork is not by default - labtexts don't require working at specific times in the season without the mystery.

1 Like
5

To some extent, you do need to confirm to astrological cycles, even without any mystery

If you miss more than twenty days, you
cannot perform a laboratory activity at all, as
you lose your synchronization with the cycles
of the heavens.

ArM5 p103

2 Likes
6

Sure... but you could also say that even in parallel, you are simply copying your experiment and the copy takes less time. Your Magic Theory lets you calculate that you'll finish it all on time and be able to take in account the astrological cycles and all given you have the necessary lab total.

W

1 Like
7

Certainly, you can rationalize it however you want, since it is a completely made up system.

I just think it is more reasonable that way, and IMHO it prevents potential abuse.

8

It's a valid reading. Frankly, as someone who uses experimentation a lot on things that don't require it for the lab total, I tend to think things sequentially since you can't plan a season without knowing your final lab total. So I plan the main lab work, I roll my dices to check what happens, then I look to see if I have 10 or 20 spare total to create a small spell on the side. And sometimes I create 2-3 versions of the same spell in a season if I don't like the side effect / flaw of the first one. Requiring me to decide to create 2 versions of the same spell from the start of the season because I can't do them sequentially, hoping to have a good one, would make experiments I enjoy very unfun.

1 Like
9

Not much abuse in my book to cut your lab total into smaller activities.

Still, your way leads to a simpler, slower paste of game which, if players agree, can be more pleasant to enforce as you do less min/maxing of every season... then again, some players live for that min/maxing.

I think in RAW, both ways are acceptable which means it is left to the troupe to decide.

I'd just recommend to choose one or the other in a given campaign just to avoid confusion and a bit of frustration of some players... unless they are all happy having it their way.

W

1 Like