If I want a character with an effective score of 7 in some Ability and spend the XP to get there, sacrificing other things along the way, then decide later on to change out a virtue for Puissant, I've recovered 65 XP to redistribute. Or, if the only way I can get to a score of 7 in an ability immediately out of gauntlet is with Puissant, it also represents 65 XP.
The analysis of Puissant is correct, but the best use of Skilled Parens (or Gild Trained, which is even better) is slightly different, and works best in conjuction with a puissant and an affinity.
If I want to represent a Flambeau master determined to make his apprentice be the hottest new magus at Tribunal, I stack Puissant(Ig) Affinity(Ig) and Skilled Parens (dump more xps into Ig).
If I want to represent a magus with a bunch of low level abilities or Arts, Puissant doesn't help. Though this is rather inefficient. 
If I want to dump more xps into mastered spells for a magus with FM, Skilled Parens is better than Mastered Spells; Puissant X doesn't help me at all.
Anyway,
Ken
see Making extremely powerful mundane combatants? - #13 by Tugdual
IC is pointless because you can have Char+2 from the 7 free points. A fighter can have 2,1,1,1 on the 4 physical char and Per+1. Once you get there, IC only gives you an extra +1.
As for the "can't buy", you are just demonstrating the opposite: not only does it save you xp, but it also allows you to exceed the age limit.
- Fine, keep the age limit and get MT 5: 3+2 "allowed you to put" 45xp "elsewhere".
- Or look 30 years after Gauntlet: MoH Ranulf+30 "allowed him to put" 85 xp "elsewhere".
{Which means Ranulf saved 45 xp at Gauntlet and another 40 xp later, almost 3 years of Later Life}
The only way to say "Puissant is bad" is to pick a Char+0 along with an Ability 3, aka something you are unwilling to use.
Ah, but what if you spent those 7 points on a +3 stat and a +1 stat? Then IC gets you another +2. Of course most characters will stack their best characteristic with their Puissant, but moving a +2 to a +3 can be almost as valuable as Puissant, given that it can apply across multiple Abilities.
Exceeding the age limit is indeed the best use of Puissant. And by my experience one of the most common uses, which (to me) means that the whole idea of 'saving' xp isn't what's happening here; as much xp as allowed was spent on the skill and a virtue was used to augment it as much as possible. That's perfectly valid, but it would be disingenuous to suggest that 'saved' the character from buying Ability 7. It was the ONLY way a starting character could get an Ability of 7.
I never said Puissant was BAD, it's actually quite GOOD. But the 'saving' argument is less favorable than was presented; your 85 xp saved after 40 years is still less than the 90xp worth of stuff Skilled Parens gives fresh from gauntlet (which is equal to 3 years of later life). It's a question of invest for now or invest for later. Later looks best from a pure math perspective, but investing for now helps you get to the 'later'.
I used to think that way about Improved Characteristics being great. And it is quite good, though not optimal, because I can get multiple +3 characteristics if I am willing to decide that some characteristics can have a -2 or even -3. (I have Pixie blood, so Str -3!)
Which is strictly equivalent to spending +2,+2,+1 and using IC to get Char+3. This clearly shows that +3, +4 and +5 have the same "cost" of 1 Virtue, even if you can offset the +3 without using a Virtue.
Obviously, increasing a Characteristics by 2 can be better than getting Puissant twice. Therefore Char+5 has priority over double Puissant. OTOH, consider my "good Virtue" cost is 60 xp = 2 years of Later Life. This means you're "spending" 280 xp on both Abilities before "saving" 130 xp going score 5+2. Most of the apprenticeship xps would end up there. A single Puissant (Ability) is all you should get.
The same argument goes for Puissant (Art) vs Method Caster et al. Except Puissant(Tech) and Puissant(Form) can add up.
tl;dr
Don't get Puissant (Ability) twice.
But that's a different set of goalpost, dixit:
That's the nail in the coffin. Int, Sta, Qik, Per leaves 4 dump Characteristics for magi.
I don't consider Com a dump stat for magi. Especially magi who wish to write books or teach apprentices.
1 Like
That's true. 3 dump Chars is still enough: {3,1, 3,-3, 3,-3, 3,-3} offers 4 Char+3 with either {Per+1, Com+1, Qik+1} as you see fit.
Yes it is. Mea culpa 
. "In this regard" was from an 'xp savings' perspective.
An extra +1 in a Characteristic could yield more 'xp savings' than Puissant does, because Characteristics apply to multiple Ability totals but Puissant applies only to one (combat skills being the important exception, though most of the combat Characteristics also apply to non-combat skills). So 'in this regard', Puissant looks poor at saving you XP compared to the potential for IC to do so. If a magus has +2 Int and takes IC to bump it to +3 (or Great to bump +3 to +4), he could buy all his Int linked Abilities at one lower and save far more than a single Puissant would save him. It's build dependent, but what isn't?
Again, though, I don't believe Puissant is about 'xp savings', but gaining maximum Ability+Characteristic possible, or the ancillary benefits of Puissant in things like Magic Theory (increased vis limit), verditus magic (vis reduction opening devices), and so forth, because Puissant adds to totals that might not include a Characteristic.
Such a character begins looking more like a caricature, though. and some builds may not think Presence is a dump stat, it isn't if you want to interact with others. -3 Presence, the Gof, and you want to do what!.
Dex is also important for self defense, dodge, or wielding a staff defensively.
Strength, IMO, is the only safe dump stat for most magi, but there are some exceptions to this.
Yes, but it's more to show that you don't need IC even in those extreme cases.
Yes, that is true, and I did use it initially for magi. If that was 100% true, we'd pick 10 Great (Characteristics) and be done with it... 
Well, we're not doing it so there must be a reason... It's more an intuition or feeling than a hard proof and I'm going completely meta here
- We are using 1d10
- Very hard roll have 10% chance of success, +1 double that to 20% {but barely affects your chances of failure}
- Easy rolls have 80%, +1 does little {but halves your chances of failure, see do-or-die below}
- We have steps
- 1 EF step is 3, if you don't get +3, it doesn't matter
- 1 Wound step is 5, if you don't get +5, it doesn't matter
- There are classes of Abilities whose uses differ:
- ancillary benefits as you say, {MT is better than Int} <- want Puissant
- signature do or die like Finesse, {if you need it you want 9, if you don't 1 is enough} <- want Puissant or Great
- EF continuous like Dominion Lore, <- need +3 for a step (?)
- opposed roll like Single Weapon or Folk Ken <- need +3 to go from 50% to 75% (?)
- non-Abilities like Initiative <- want Fast Caster
- Single Weapon et al. is a special case:
- you only really need 1 mastered
- uses Dex and Qik, halving Char boost value
- works for attack and defense, +2 into his wound step, -2 out of yours
That makes it 8:1 for Puissant, compared to 1:1 usually
- Conclusion
As I see it, if you followed all that rambling, only EF and continuous might want IC. I don't believe they are worth boosting:
- I don't care if I miss a hard EF Dominion Lore, 10% ain't enough for me,
- my SG will balance the opposition to match my total unless it's part of my panache.
Narrativism vs Gamist might make you feel otherwise, but that's completely YSMV.
Note my "if".
Going with Dex/Str at -3 gives lots of points, but this is not a normal person! Not necessarily abnormal, but... exclusive. Even my Dex and Str are better than that.
I like optimizing, but I also like being able to see my characters as real people.
Pre/Com are good at Tribunal. Also for talking politics with the pope in a confession booth . ReMe doesn't work well there, but Com+Ability (Hermetic Law? Charm? Etiquette?) do. Pre also important for these situations.
Com is good for writing and teaching.
If you want to be a Mystagogue, Pre is quite important. (And what Bjornaer isn't, eventually, at least for himself?)
Loading characteristics is optimal for characters going "wide." But Puissant+Affinity is better for going narrow. And not always that narrow:
-
The classic (Pu+Af)(Te+Fo)+Focus gets an outsized benefit from Pu, which is not gotten from Int (doesn't apply to casting) or Sta (doesn't apply to invention.) That's 2Pu, which are both very worthwhile. And if the character also had (Pu+Af)(MT+Parma), he's still doing well in ways that improving characteristics really doesn't help much. Of course, we have just spent 9 virtue points in total. That last point probably shouldn't go to characteristics.
-
Or FM with (Pu+Af)*(MT+Parma)+Strong Parens+ Gild Trained is also 9vp, and benefits from these virtues in ways that boosting Int or Sta to +4 does not exceed.
The better characteristic offers a useful but different benefit:
A Bonisagus or Verditius generalist who already has Inventive Genius and (Pu+Af)*(MT) does well to boost Int to +5!
An academic is better off boosting Int to +5 than trying to lay virtues on all those academic abilities he uses. (AL, Phil, Med, Law...) Unless he is a specialist.
I find that I always want the +4 or +5 yet it rarely makes sense, either from characterization (+5 means he has peers but no human superiors for that characteristic) or optimization (as discussed above.)
Anyway,
Ken
Anyway,
Ken
1 spell level =/= 1 experience point. Yes, you can buy a spell level with an experience point for advanced magi, but even that section recommends against doing so. If you look at seasons of effort, which is a much more reasonable equivalence in many ways, it comes out closer to 2.5 spell levels = 1 experience point. My magi who like to load up on spells tend to have lab totals of 20 with Te+Fo=0 within two years or so after gauntlet. Such magi could pick up 30 levels of original spells in 3 seasons in the worst case. With lab texts it would only take 1.5 seasons. In better Te+Fo combinations it comes out closer to a season, or less than a season using lab texts. Meanwhile it's pretty rare to pick up 30 experience in a single season, let alone two. That's why the best I can figure is about 2.5 spell levels = 1 experience point.
If you doubt this, look at the specifics. How many levels of spells does Ranulf pick up in a single season of working on spells?
If we examine Skilled Parens that way, it comes closer to 72 experience. So I would rate 85 experience of savings having gone well past Skilled Parens a little while ago.
I do prefer Baccalaureate and Gild Trained to Strong Parens. Baccalaureate provides 90xp, 80 of which go for Latin 5 and AL 1, leaving 10xp for other useful Abilities, like AL2 or Ph1+X1.
Gild Trained provides the best deal, 90xp for anything.
xps at chargen vs Affinities/Book Learner/etc? Depends on length of saga, source qualities in saga, Hermetic age at start of saga, etc.
Reasonable cases can be constructed for the superiority of either approach.
Trivium and Quadrivium is subsumed in AL, Baccalaureate does not cover Philosophiae. So AL2 it is.
Hmm. I thought it covered all academic abilities. AL2 is still useful.
It seems we have a good group of Virtues that are pretty similar in strength that represent the upper tier of the Minor Virtues:
Affinity, Apt Student, Baccalaureate, Book Learner, Faerie Blood (God), Faerie Sympathy, Gild Training, Independent Study, Minor Magical Focus, Puissant, and Skilled Parens
Which one is better varies a bit based on short-term versus long-term, starting as apprentices or starting after gauntlet, etc. Improved Characteristics and Great Characteristic could probably be put in there as well, looking at opinions here. Personally, I would also include Cautious Sorcerer, Faerie Blood (Dwarf), and Imbued with the (Spirit of Form).
Generally, I agree, though starting magi often take a lot of low level spells of differing Te/Fo, so 30 spell levels could well represent 6 level 5 spells, or 1 1/2 years of lab activity (or 2 x 10 and 2 x 5, which is one year's worth). It's not difficult to squeeze equivalent value out of it.