In response to yesterday's post, Ananael made a comment that I am reproducing here for those of you that normally don't read the comments.
Ananael Qaa said...
Quoting myself he said: The idea is fine actually plugging in numbers may have little value.
Then he added: That's pretty much my take on it as well. It's an interesting analysis that takes into account some factors that are often overlooked, but the factors themselves are too subjective and with the way you multiply them together small errors can have huge effects on the overall number. For example, if your objective score on one of the first four factors was 1 but you misestimated it as 2, your final score would be double the objective value even if you got everything else right. This is true for all of the factors, meaning that without perfect estimates on the part of everyone involved the final scores won't really be comparable with each other.
Personally I rely on probability testing. Cast a spell versus a known probability, check the shift above chance, and repeat to get a decent sample size. A bigger shift at least implies that you're a better magician, and it has the advantage of being an objective measurement.
I have to agree. Then again, I'd have to ask what you're so far away from that you'd have to make big shifts like that.
Another idea I'd like to add is the better magician you are, the less magick you have to do.
It is possible to reach a connected zone in which the thought of doing magick manifests all by itself. The mere act of considering an effect of magick manifests. I've been in such zones from time to time and it is frosty balls cool.
After that, comes a stage where you don't even have to think about magick. Things just hum. You're in the Tao. If you get there, you don't do magick; you are magick.