I'd be inclined to pick a limit for their arts gain, like say double their current art. But then allow them to use the remaining experience for transformations as per Realms of Power: Magi, converting the actual exp into transformation exp at an inflated rate. A ratio around 1/100 or so seems pretty reasonable, that'd net you on the most simplistic scale of things 2 Major Virtues of any kind.
In 4th Edition, learning was capped to allow a raise of three points, all excess xp were lost.
If this isn't the case in 5th Ed., I'd consider this an erratum.
Buggerit, my post got eaten, only the quote remained.
I meant to mention that a minor version of Flawless Magic for a single Art sounds interesting. For a specialist the easy way to mastery may be a good idea for a single art, leaving room for a Major Hermetic virtue. But it may seem pricy when the Major version covers everything. I like Flawless Magic and tend to take it a lot. But for a lot of my spells I can't find anything really useful for, but mastery of some kind always helps.
As for the OPs topic of excessive rolls I've never seen is happen in my groups. At one time I did roll above 80 for vis study, taking from 0 to the two digits, instantly making this magus the Animal specialist of the saga.
Although very unlikely, rolls as high as the OP mentions I would not like to spoil the balance of the saga or affect the fabric of the Order too much. A freak occurrence with dice should not spoil too,much.
Consider the differences in mechanics of vis study though.
4 th let you study from 1-3 pawns,for a gain of stress die x 1-3. So a really high roll could be multiplied by 3.
5 th only has 1 stress die plus adds, the probability of more than a 3 level gain - at high levels - is low. I don't mind than the powers levels can be proceeded through fast. A good primer of level 5 Q 15 makes sense, so vis study should also allow his. But for book study you reach natural limits of both Lvel and Quality. Vis study has no theoretical limit, but then again in only happens very rarely that extreme rolls create extreme gains.
I would have to agree with this on the importance of balancing his roll for the saga. If you feel that permitting the mage to keep the Mentem score of 113 he rolled would completely unbalance the game, you need to negotiate with the player a fair compromise that allows him to retain the benefit of his awesome roll. We don't really know what you consider fair and balanced in your saga. Is the player and/or troupe interested in running stories around the possible ramifications of his higher Art score?
One example I will throw out would be to cap his improvement to 46 as Jonathan.Link suggested, then add one or two minor Mentem related virtues, maybe conversion of Mentem affinity to puissant (if he had one), and then a free spell. Another example benefit that comes to mind is that in previous editions, a beneficial twilight scar could allow you to write books on an Art at a higher fraction of your Art total (1/2 became 2/3, and 3/4 on multiple awards). This could certainly gain him some fame and prestige for the level and quality he could write.
All the same...
The "max three levels limit" was there to prevent extreme outcomes. A safeguard against statistical horrors. Which is why I consider this an erratum, IMAO.
An erratum is issued by the designer. In addition, the mechanic you are speaking of worked throughout the entire advancement system, not just studying from vis. So, applying grit consistently, as in 4th edition l5q15 and l6q21 books are worthless to advance in a single. A serious point that it isn't an erratum in any reasonable opinion. Another point is this edition has been out for how long?
If you're going to cap something that has been balanced, you'll also be changing the average expected result. In all fairness, you should adjust something else to make up for this, such as setting a minimum to the roll as well. After all, the player rolled with an acceptance of a certain average. If 0s weren't changed before, it's a little unfair to change the policy now in only one direction. I'm not saying don't change it, just change it fairly. Of course, if the cap is set around a thousand, this ceases to be so important.
Many good suggestions were made.
It comes to this question: can your saga and your storyteller cope with a 100+ score in Mentem ? If yes, then let the player enjoy it. It only happens once in a gamer's life.
If no, what kind of reward would be appropriate ?
Capping at twice his initial level sound appropriate, or at 42, or other symbolic number you are comfortable with. This hard cap can be the seed of a story itself: the magus suddendly discover that there is a force preventing him to go any further. Is it Divine knowledge ? Is a path worth following to discover a fragment of the global theory ?
Regarding complementary rewards I would go with something unique, like Flexible magic with Mentem. Or he gain 2 mastery level in each Mentem spell of his own and acquire Flawless magic (Mentem). I find that Puissant or Affinity are not so interesting since he already has the highest by a far margin from the Order and probably won't have much interest in going any further (especially considering the XP he will need to build up to get the next level). Life-linked with Mentem or even a variant of Diedne Magic, but limited to Mentem only (and obviously without the Flaw coming with it).
Any of those or combination of those could be a suitable alternative to the 113 Arts score.
I'd be fine at doubling my score and then Deft Mentem, if I didn't already have it, personally.
Deft Mentem, is like 30 xp of spell mastery per Mentem spell, or a +15 casting bonus for situations where one might have cast without gestures or voice...
I prefer the idea of letting the player bank the doublers. Say they rolled six "1's" and an eight for 512xp (plus Aura). I'd negotiate and ask them to use only the first three doublers for 64+ xp, then save three in reserve to be called in whenever for whichever character they are playing at the time.
Would you also allow one to rearrange the botch dice in situations unfavorable to a player?
64 XP, is an increase of 2 points in the Art, maybe 3 depending upon how much was needed for the next threshold. Say this was done for studying from vis, again, and the player rolled a 0, would that then be a 10, doubled by all of the ones? I find it somewhat ironic that you are using such a limiting method on the player for something the rules clearly allow.
I wouldn't be using anything on anyone. It is negotiation, an offer, and it would be strictly voluntary.
And I suppose it is relative to what their score was to begin with and where it ends up. 64xp is enough to go from 5 to 12. But this just an example. Nothing hard or fast about this idea and I have yet to run into this issue.
And yeah, I would let them turn a 0 into a 20 as gratitude for making this compromise. It has nothing to do with rules or laws or hard limits. It is all about negotiation of the play contract.
It is metagame stuff. Not for Lawful Neutral gamers, only the Chaotic Good.
:mrgreen: