Hi,
I've noticed over the years, or maybe just inferred, that your preferences tend toward lower rather than higher power. So you're less likely to see this play out. From that vantage, optimizations that depend upon this standout linearly-scaling game mechanic seem to be pure theorycrafting.
OTOH, I have seen and done it. Extra optimization: In many cases, the magus using the lab does not need to be the one investing the time to improve his lab.
Anyway,
Ken
Power level, schmower level, Ars is high powered from the beginning, and I don't see a lot of reasons to go from 11 to 11.2. I would say, however, that such abuses of having someone create a lab for another are rather mechanical aspects of achieving high power. I'm more of the frame of mind that a magus needs to invest time to become powerful, not have someone so generously invest time on his behalf. It strains my suspension of disbelief a bit that there are all these altruistic characters out there who go about making stuff for other characters that come along later. It smacks more of a player being a munchkin than anything else.
I'll concede that a magus dedicated to some endeavor can design a lab that has huge bonuses for some purpose. But in the intervening time he's accomplished exactly what? Again, it strains my suspension of disbelief enough to find that a character that can actually have enough time to satisfy demands of Covenant and House, improve one's Arts, make or buy a Longevity ritual, make a talisman, empower the talisman, bind a familiar, empower the bond of the familiar and train an apprentice. A person can't do it all, and if a player focuses on improving their lab, what are they giving up, and how does giving that up help them over and above any of the things I've mentioned above. Granted, once Arts hit the level 20 mark, improving one's lab is probably the fastest way to improve lab totals, but then again, a familiar provides a consistent General Quality bonus to any lab total, too. Further, an Apprentice, for a period of 15 years, or 45 seasons provides a significant bonus to magical activities (granted, the first few seasons are low, but the average will work out, discounting situation such as training your future apprentice Magic Theory in advance).
Spending a season to invent an item to improve the lab sounds all well and good, and you say it's a linear progression, which it is, but it's still and investment of time, and I seriously, as Tellus mentioned, don't see all these magi having all this time available to spend improving their lab when you have all the other more interesting things to do. Oh, I'll admit that I used to be seduced by the idea of having a magus spend a lot of time improving the lab, but it's ultimately boring as a player. Power level has little to do with it, because, Ars is high powered from the beginning, and I get very little benefit from spending seasons in the lab to improve a lab bonus compared to being out in the saga's world. My magi enjoy their lab time as much as the next person, but it has to have a purpose, and spending a lot of time on infrastructure like improving the lab isn't always as useful as making an item, or going out to stop a rampaging faerie/dragon/demon.
Hi Ken,
Before I make an item, I tell the SG what it does, how it will work in the lab and justify any bonuses it will grant.
Hi,
So judgy!
There's more than one way to play. There's more than one measure.
Clearly you're counting in base-5, because objectively, AM has a power level of 6.39 (on the Boggs-Steuben scale, measured at the equator.) That's moderate power, to be sure, but rpgs routinely achieve 9.0 or better.
It's only abuse if it's non-consensual. Otherwise it's an alternative lifestyle.
How about characters who are impressed into service, or who expect a very good return on their investment, or who extract vitality, or have an ancestral debt to repay, or are young Tremere, or are service-oriented submissives, or are doing this in exchange for something that the beneficiary would rather do, or....
Can't argue with that! Munchkins are just plain Evil. They ruin everything. Bad, bad munchkins. Shame on them for thinking that any powers in an rpg above the bottom 35% might also be for them.
A familiar provides a constant bonus plus a scaling bonus that increases in proportion to the square root of the Cord Strength. Want a great familiar? First develop a lab that provides a big bonus to the Lab Total used to bind the familiar.
Of course, the apprentice follows the usual rules for advancement (not linear). And there's a 1 season/year ongoing cost. But absolutely: If you want to do big things in the lab, get an apprentice! And a familiar! And a good leadership score....
Sure. But so is reading from a Q25 tractatus! GM: We're going to have the climactic adventure of the saga! Your character might die! Player: Heck, I'll skip that, because my magus has better things to do than risk death. Uh huh.
Only 6.39!
Oh, no! Is this where all the evil munchkins get to point fingers right back at you, and accuse you of Bad RP, because you're doing what benefits you rather than the character?
"I read from the Q25 tractatus" is surely less fun than an adventure.
Aren't there are any number of magi who need much better labs for all sorts of useful reasons (or for reasons they think are useful)?
Aren't there sagas which start 30 or more years past Gauntlet?
More than one way to skin a cat. (Though admittedly, ReAn is the way to bet. Unless the cat is still alive and you don't care about preserving the skin, in which case PeAn.)
Anyway,
Ken
Hi,
Which is great! If you agree, and your GM agrees, it's good.
The rest of us are spectators and kibitzers.
Anyway,
Ken
One of the reasons that my magus is trying to improve his lab so much is because he wants to compete in the Verditius Contest. He is spending his time building his lab and his resources because he wants to win the Journeyman prize.
He is only gaining exposure XP for lots of seasons of work, because of this, his arts are suffering - the other magi in the covenant are reading books and going on adventures.
He has negotiated to get out of covenant services for a few years and he has put out word that he will do commissions for people. Inside his lab, for enchanting, he will have good lab-totals. For most other types of activities, and outside his lab, he will be at a disadvantage compared to magi of a similar age. This is a price he is willing to pay (for now) because he has his goal of the Contest.
You do forget that you started with higher scores than the rest of us because of complex character gen, old chap. (Playing the other verditius in this particular saga)
I wonder if it makes sense, to limit any particular lab bonus (not all that may apply) to the Magic Theory score...
So, you might get +6 for items and +6 for Ignem if your Magic Theory score is 6, on a Wand Pilum of fire, even though you've improved your lab, such that you can get a bonus of 8 on Igem and 9 on items...
That's why I was asking if there was such a limit.
Complex Character Gen got me a bonus to begin with. Not as high as it could have been if I munchkined it, but higher than the others who used standard character generation. My character is also older than most of the other magi which also increases my overall XP. But the other magi in the saga will be getting adventure XP and studying (average of 10XP per season), and I will only get 3XP (Affinity Magic Theory), they will gain 28XP per year that I spend improving my lab, and after 10 years that adds up to quite a lot.
Close. If you want to have such a limit (There is none in canon), I think it should be the Lab's Refinement Score. That makes Refinement useful, which it rarely is now.......
I'm well aware that there is none in canon. That's why I postulated it for discussion. The problem with linking it to the Refinement score, is that the Refinement score is generally going to be really low, since Refinement cannot be larger than Magic Theory -3. So, take a magus with an MT of 6, which isn't hard to get, his cap for bonuses then becomes 3, and that's only if he's spent 3 seasons actually refining his lab.
Sure. But once you start house ruling stuff, that's easily fixed. What do you want the Refinement score to be? In a system where there's limits on bonuses, maybe it's Magic Theory +3. You still have to put the time in, which is the expensive part, and it solves the big problem with using Magic Theory as the baseline. Labs change hands for various reasons. Using Magic Theory opens up a huge can of worms. Whoops, my MT is only 5 and this is an item that gives a +8 bonus. Now what? More house rules......... As opposed to Refinement, where the rules have been written down. At worst, a ST might require a season to "learn" the lab.
No, the idea behind house ruling stuff is to fix broken stuff, clarify rules, or, perhaps to modify the game in ways that the troupe wants to play. And then when you implement a house rule, you need to make it simple, so it impacts as few other things as possible.
Since you bring up taking over a lab, and you bring up written rules, your suggestion completely ignores the interaction of Magic Theory, Refinement and taking over a lab, which I considered and decided that limiting bonuses to Magic Theory is more straightforward. Agreed, spending time for Refinement is more costly, but your rule requires an additional House rule that specifically addresses an issue that you mentioned.
And, to be frank, I don't really care when a character with a lower knowledge of Magic Theory moves into a new (to him) lab. A Magic 6 character taking over a lab used by a Magic Theory 10 character who spent a lot of time adding stuff to his lab to provide bonuses, it makes sense for that character to not be able to use the lab to full effect.
Although my verditius is happy for there not to be any limits, I realise that some people may want to impose some.
I was actually considering a different way. Similar to a focus. A lab can only provide a bonus equal to your weakest art in the lab-total.
It doesn't matter how high the bonus is, you are capped in how much raw magic you can manipulate.
Hi,
It could make sense.... but I think it makes even more sense not to use Covenant's lab rules at all, for a 'standard' AM game.
Using the Core rules alone, MT 6 provides a lab bonus of 6. Add covenants, even limited as you suggest (if I understand you correctly), and that becomes 18 for this application (items that involve Ignem), with not too bad an investment.
This is pure escalation: It isn't adding options; it just makes the numbers bigger. I have nothing against big numbers. I do have something against unexpected big numbers. Magi using the rules from Covenants simply have better labs.
Strangely enough, these labs are not necessarily even more flavorful, since in the absence of any rules telling me the effects of some particular lab feature, I'm free to describe my lab as I please. No glassware and all magic mushrooms? Ok. A gem-encrusted coffin lined with lead, in which I lie for a season dreaming? Um, ok. Weird, but fine. It breaks nothing, though it forces us to consider Bonisagus' theory as something that encompasses approaches involving beakers and reagents with approaches involving reading tea leaves (from expensive, imported plants, of course).
Unlike the scribing rules from Covenants (which I also prefer to avoid, but do not consider broken) which replace the core rules with something more complex that tends to give similar results except at the extremes, this is a pure add-on.
Anyway,
Ken