[Squirrel]

Dear users of this forum!

I humbly request your cooperation in this theoretical inquiry.

Some or a lot of you will think 5 karma is spot on for spell costs, but if you'd have to change it where would you tend towards?

Context:

I am currently thinking about halving karma costs so that we get back into the 4th ed char gen territory of about 400-500 points.
This is happening along side various simplification to amass a set of house rules for my group and maybe the world out there, if they don't suck.

Thank you all for your participation in text and/or vote! 

[Jack_Spade]

I'm ok with the status quo, but they sure shouldn't be any more expensive.
That is: I would be ok if aspected magicians would get spells at char gen. Rising costs on spells would even more gimp them than they already are.

[MijRai]

To explain my vote for making prices lower if necessary...  Just do something along the lines of Qualities in Character Creation.  They're cheaper to purchase during CC, return to normal price in-game.  So charge 2 or 3 Karma for new spells to begin with, leave the price the same everywhere else. 

[Marcus]

I echo Mij and Spade.

[Sendaz]

I would go with MijRai suggestion of reduced cost during chargen and regular otherwise.

The mage already paid the entry fee in the form of paying for his Magic score and the currents costs to adding spells to one's repertoire are pretty fair to advance with.

[Squirrel]

To clarify, the costs at chargen and inplay will not differ. It is either always less or always more.
This thread is not about how (aspected) mages will be compensated for their additional costs or limtations.

[Whiskeyjack]

Pretty much everything is overcosted in karma in this edition.

[Hobbes]

Magic advancement overall is lower cost than Stat or Skill advancement so I'd leave the Magic advancement as is and address Stat/Skill advancement somehow. 

So, I guess I'm in the leave it as is category. 

[Whiskeyjack]

Magic advancement overall is lower cost than Stat or Skill advancement so I'd leave the Magic advancement as is and address Stat/Skill advancement somehow. 

True, and fair!

[Squirrel]

Again, "keeping as is" does not help me.

[Sendaz]

Again, "keeping as is" does not help me.

Well in that case I would lower it a bit because:

A) I play a mage. 
B) Did pay the entry fee in chargen to become a mage.
C) Having more access to spells will give people a reason to take spells for added functionality.

That said however, doing so may then make the Mage even more a Jack of All Trades that will let them step on a lot more toes of the rest of the party.

[Kiirnodel]

Again, "keeping as is" does not help me.

Based on your OP, if you are looking at the 4th ed. Char gen costs, Spells cost 3 BP at character generation, and then 5 karma during play. So based on that, you would be rounding up if you are doing something to effectively halve the cost of things.

That being said, it wouldn't be that hard to just use 4th edition char-gen rules with the Fifth Edition changes. There are only a few changes and most of them aren't to the base system that is needed for basic creation.

[Rosa]

I would decrease them, as it can only be helpfull to a team if the spell slinger is more versatile in what they can do and Theres plenty of other stuff a magician needs to spend karma on.

Personally i think the cost of 5 karma is sort of ok, however if pressed i would definitely lower the costs for the reasons stated above. I think 3 karma to learn a spell is more fair tbh.

[Squirrel]

That being said, it wouldn't be that hard to just use 4th edition char-gen rules with the Fifth Edition changes. There are only a few changes and most of them aren't to the base system that is needed for basic creation.

I am not a fan of the 4th char gen. I just happen to mention that the amount of points would reach roughly that level from back then. 4th BP system is the worst of both worlds. The minmax of priority due to flat costs and the high numbers of points and choices of the karmabuy system. 4th BP sucks.

Clarification:
This is not an attempt to square 4th ed BP with 5th ed!

[Dinendae]

I think they are ok, but if I had to change them, I would opt to slightly decrease costs.