> All mechanics aside (and below), I'd first of all worry about a player
> who is setting themselves up to be a purely "support" character who
> provides for others' awesome but doesn't have their own awesome. I'd
> make sure that they have something else going on for them, even if it
> is abilities that they have from using their own potions for a long
> time or something, so they don't get backgrounded. (It's not as much
> of an issue in Smallville as in more traditional supers games, but
> still…)
A couple of things.
First, and for my purposes, most critical, the player's dropped the
alchemist idea and is going with Magical Heritage and not worrying
about granting abilities to others on the perfectly reasonable grounds
that, as this is the first time we're playing, we really shouldn't be
trying to take the system apart and invent whole new mechanics.
Second, having played with her for years, I assure you that she's not
interested in being purely support -- she's thinking of the magical
equivalent of a gadgeteer, basically, someone who can make gear or
potions or whatever and use them herself OR give them to friends --
both options. But, we're not sure if Smallville's actually designed
with that in mind.
That said, thanks for the answers -- I definitely need to re-read the
core book and read Watchtower Report!
> You could implement this using Grant and Boost as suggested (and the
> Trouble cost is I think spot-on).
>
> Alchemy (Distinction)
> You practice the quasi-scientific, quasi-mystical art of alchemy, the
> study of transformations, transmutation, and discovery. While the end
> goal of alchemy is the transformation and improvement of the self, the
> path it takes concerns itself with more material things, like potions
> and transmutations.
> d4 Add a d6 to Trouble to give a potion to another character (or
> yourself), Granting them any Ability at d4.
> d8 Add a d10 to Trouble to Boost an Ability granted by Alchemy.
> d12 Spend a plot point to Refresh your own Angry or Afraid stress.
>
> I would make it really damn clear and explicit to the alchemy player
> that not only will they be pumping tons of dice into Trouble, you'll
> be tapping lots of rolled complications as unintentional side-effects
> and fallout of all the potion-guzzling. ;)
Hm. This sounds workable, but I'm agreeing with the player that we
should try something simpler for the first game.