Originally posted by The Wizard of Oz
Holden said that most people in the setting can't actually learn sorcery, even if they have Occult 3. You need to have some ineffible quality to have the potential to learn sorcery, which only a tiny portion of the population actually have (including all PCs who want to learn sorcery, for convenience). So you can't set up sorcery schools and just churn out tons of sorcerers.
So, my friend was wondering:
1) Would it be okay to give someone this potential via a working?
2) Could you teach someone who had this potential a sorcerous working (their first one I guess) via a sorcerous-working?
3) Could you just initiate some random guy (with Occult 3) with a working, making them a sorcerer? (Ie someone who probably doesn't have said ineffible potential)
4) What about thaumaturgy? Could you use a working to give someone thaumaturgy? And if so, would it be "make them an exorcist" (ie a specific thaumaturgy ritual), or "give them the capability of learning thaumaturgy"?
And with the above, would you have to do some kind of dramatic magical transformation, or could you just, say, put them in your mystic ritual circle that puts a sliver of wyld in their heart and now they're a sorcerer (with the wyld-based initiation ritual) but they look the same outside, and haven't really changed besides being a sorcerer (which, you know, is quite a big change, but still)?
For about 99% of cases, this is kind of overthinking it. If a PC sorcerer wants to take on an apprentice and train them in the ways of magic, it's perfectly fine for the Storyteller to simply fiat that character having the capacity for sorcery.
However, creating a huge populace of sorcerers with a working has all the same setting verisimilitude issues as creating an academy, possibly even more. Nothing will go wrong at your table (probably) if you let a player do it, but it's not the kind of thing you'll ever see in published material.