[falar]

Honestly, I think spell costs are okay. The only problem is that other archetypes can't grab cool new things like spells as fast. So the only reason I'd increase them is to even off progression between mages and mundanes.

That said - I'd probably do this:

• Your first [Magic] spells costs 4 karma apiece
• You second [Magic] spells cost 6 karma apiece
• You third [Magic] spells cost 8 karma apiece
• You fourth [Magic] spells cost 10 karma apiece
• You fifth [Magic] spells cost 12 karma apiece

I'd probably allow metamagics that allow you to specialize in certain category that reduce the cost of all spells in that category by 3.

[Whiskeyjack]

Honestly, I think spell costs are okay. The only problem is that other archetypes can't grab cool new things like spells as fast. So the only reason I'd increase them is to even off progression between mages and mundanes

Good reason to drop costs across the board IMO 

[Squirrel]

falar, that could get messy with raising of magic.

[Sendaz]

plus raising costs then offering discounts to lower them back down just seems to be adding more paperwork.

Which is fine for a Logic tradition because they like that sort of thing, but not so much for the other guys.

[Mirikon]

Part of the problem is that learning the spell is the only way to gain access to the spell, unless you happen to know an alchemist who can make preparations of that spell. And since the alchemist won't be there, you're limited to timed or contact preparations, which have issues of their own.

Back in 4th, I proposed something I called Spell Matrices, as a nod to a construct from Earthdawn. How I set it up, you had a material object which held the 'pattern' for the spell, at a set Force. These items cost 1 Karma to bind them, but with that, you could cast the spell in the item at the force set at creation (making spellcasting and drain resistance rolls as normal) so long as you held the item during casting. So say you had a revolver that had a Fireball (Force 4) spell in it. You'd have to have the revolver in hand to use the spell, and every time you used it, it would be at Force 4. Since these are physical items that can be broken or stolen, and don't actually increase dice pools like Foci do, it seemed like a reasonable price. Especially since you'd basically be screaming that you're a mage, and move yourself to the top of everyone's 'to geek' list.

[falar]

Honestly, I think spell costs are okay. The only problem is that other archetypes can't grab cool new things like spells as fast. So the only reason I'd increase them is to even off progression between mages and mundanes

Good reason to drop costs across the board IMO 

That's what I'd do. But the question wasn't that.

I personally think that advancement is hella screwed up. I believe you should be able to do some kind of advancement every one or two sessions starting out.

[Darzil]

Personally I'm starting to consider flattening advancement in skills/attributes to match most other advancement.

Maybe something like :
Skills - 8 Karma each up to 6 skill, 12 Karma each up to 8 skill, 16 Karma each up to 10 skill, 20 Karma each up to 12 skill
Attributes - 20 Karma each
(and half that cost during character gen Karma spend)

That way you can start with an specialised character and broaden out post character gen, or a broad one and specialise post character gen, and end up at the same level of effectiveness. Gets rid of much of the push to go for 1 or 6 skill in character generation.

The rest is pretty flat already, it's just these two. Initiation isn't quite flat, but isn't far off, and some of the benefits of initiation scale by initiate grade, so aren't flat bonuses, so it's fair.

[Senko]

I'd lower them simply because as is its hard to justify some of the spells that are thematically nice but don't really offer a mechanical advantage or are situation specific variants of existing spells. Of course I only say this because of your requirements for a specific answer I'd actually prefer an alternative way to gain spells e.g. aquiring from one of those corporate data libraries that are mentioned here and there. That way a GM could grant a mage extra spells if needed or not likely to see much ingame use e.g purify fire (I can't think of many situations where removing impuriities from a flame is going to make or break a game) sadly this would be more towards the cash side rather than the karma side of the mage spell costs but I think my point stands on its own.