Lab experimentation and Luck virtue

Odd question on the Luck virtue, and Lab experimentation. I have a player who wished to take Luck as a Verditius and thought it may apply to Lab experiments. I veto'ed the use of the virtue in that manner as I thought it was beyond the intent of the Luck virtue; but thought it did raise a question: how much luck is part of the experimentation?

About a d10 worth! 8)

Hmmm - tricky question. Note that the virtue doesn't say "where luck is a factor", it says "...more a factor than skill or talent". And by the rules, it's a naked die roll - even if it may not be such in the "game world".

But I'm not sure why they want to take this (or think they do). By adding* +1-3 to the die, the experimenter would be avoiding "no extraordinary effects" (and possibly "side effects"), but have more chance to "roll twice" - which most would agree is not "lucky"! So I'm not sure how it would be much of an advantage. It's not a contested roll, there's no real advantage gained, and he might find it's a waste (or worse).

(* That's how the Virtue reads, even if the "lucky" experimenter might want to subtract it to counter added Risk. If the SG allows it to be subtracted, then the math is simply being manipulated by taking added "risk", adding to the lab total without penalty.)

In the context of that Virtue and the Lab, I'd support your decision 100% - "Luck" does not allow a bonus. (By that logic, Luck could be applied to each and every roll of a d10 - and we know that just ain't gonna happen.)

However, allowing it would hardly be a game breaker, and there is something to be said for making players happy if it really doesn't matter. And since you, as SG, control what bonus they get - meh, I might apply "the rule of Toyota" - he asks for it, he's got it. 8)

I was pondering letting Luck apply to experimentation when the "extreme" +3 is applied. In that circumstances the luck does not alter the basic result, but would allow him some choice in the type of good or bad event.

ie. The luck does not alter a good or bad result. If a bad change is the result, he can choose either the result he rolled, or the result above or below.

The reason I'm pondering is seriously is that his Verditius concept is an arcane experimenter, and I think there would be something for a Verditius Magus who is "seat-of-his-pants" in the lab as juxtaposed against a strict and proper Bonisagus.

I think Luck would apply to the experimentation roll. It seems like a good example of something that you could be lucky at.

Certainly, it should apply to the roll on the Extraordinary Results table.

I´d say let it affect lab results but not directly, you as SG rule when and what it affects instead.
A lot of luck should mean that there are less "explosions" and less damage when anything like that happen, and also that when rolls almost gave him the wanted success, then he gets it anyway...
Something like that anyway.

Sounds like a potentially fun character.

I always support players' creativity.
Compare its effects to other minor virtues like inventive genius.
I wouldn't let him avoid effects on extraordinary results but I would offer him always another result and he could choose between them. My offers would be mostly side effect, modified effect and story event for fun. Or other effects which aren't listed. If the player enjoys his character and your style he might choose even a side effect instead of no additional effect.

I wouldn't apply it to the simple die experimentation roll. That's not an activity in itself governed by luck, it's a component in a lab total. To apply luck to that would be like applying it to a combat roll, just because there's randomness involved.

I would apply it to the roll on the extraordinary results table, because that's purely a matter of luck. My apprentice with Int 0 and MT 1 gets the same roll as your archmage with Int 3 and MT 10. Whether it should be a purely random roll is another question, but it is and always has been.

How to apply it to the extraordinary results table is the hard part. Letting the player shift the result up or down by one sounds reasonable, off the top of my head.