Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Dumpshock Forums _ Shadowrun _ Power Focus

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 6 2006, 12:03 AM

What is the advantage of getting a power focus instead of a spellcasting one?

The cost of a power focus is 25,000 per force point. It adds dice to all magic rolls (except for counterspelling - which is specifically mentioned). It does not add to drain tests, since they are not magic rolls. It does not add to force level.

Spellcasting foci on the other hand cost 15,000 per force point. They add to the dice pool for spellcasting (or drain) tests.

For less cost you can purchase a spellcasting and counterspelling focus at the same force level as a power focus.

Maybe I'm missing a lot of tests that involve magic but there don't seem to be that many others that are routinely performed to me. Spellcasting and counterspelling seem to be the main ones.

Posted by: Phobos Jul 6 2006, 12:07 AM

You forget that Spellcasting Foci only help with one of five kinds of spells (Combat, Detection, Health, Illusion, Manipulation).
Power Foci help with all spell types.

Posted by: Brahm Jul 6 2006, 12:11 AM

- You need one Spellcasting focus per spell catagory, Power foci are not spell type specific.
- A Power foci also add to your Summoning/Binding/Banishing tests.
- When you are casting a spell you can gain dice from both a Power focus and a Spellcasting focus. You do this by allocating the Power focus dice to the casting pool test and the Spellcasting focus dice to the drain test pool.

EDIT Also you are limited in the number of foci you can bind at one time. Multipurpose foci become very important if you want to, for example, have multiple Counterspelling focuses to cover off the different spell catagories. Personally I think Power foci are somewhat underpriced.

Posted by: Glyph Jul 6 2006, 02:16 AM

Indeed, the ability to add dice to so many spellcasting and conjuring tests makes the power focus much more versatile than a spellcasting focus - and at char-gen, you are basically comparing a force: 3 spellcasting focus (9 points to buy and 3 points to bond) vs. a force: 2 power focus (10 points to buy and 2 points to bond). So for merely one die less, you get a lot more options.

Also, one minor clarification. A power focus won't aid you in counterspelling a hostile spell as it is cast (spell defense), but it will aid you if you try to dispel a sustained or quickened spell.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 8 2006, 04:31 PM

Thanks for the clarifications - I had missed the part about having a specific category of spells per focus. Gosh it is right in plain site:embarassed: Only excuse would have been that my character was focusing on Combat spells only at the time.

Posted by: Mr. Unpronounceable Jul 10 2006, 04:44 PM

Minor point of interest:

Buying and bonding the power focus at chargen will net you a huge karma discount relative to doing so post-chargen.

Posted by: Cheops Jul 10 2006, 05:28 PM

I thought that only one focus can apply to a test at a time and I didn't notice anything saying that the power focus breaks that rule.

Posted by: James McMurray Jul 10 2006, 05:34 PM

Only one focus per dice pool. Casting a spell involves multiple dice pools: spellcasting test and drain test.

Posted by: Thanee Jul 10 2006, 06:15 PM

Actually there is almost no point in getting anything *but* a power focus (not counting sustaining and weapon foci {EDIT: and counterspelling foci, of course}). It's just so much better than all the other ones.

Bye
Thanee

Posted by: Jaid Jul 11 2006, 03:09 AM

QUOTE (Thanee)

Actually there is almost no point in getting anything *but* a power focus (not counting sustaining and weapon foci). It's just so much better than all the other ones.

Bye
Thanee

yes there is. there just isn't any point until after you've got the power focus =D

Posted by: Samaels Ghost Jul 11 2006, 04:12 AM

Besides, of course, using Spellcasting Foci to use on drain tests. Being as you're likely going all out with that POwer Focus of yours that drain is gonna get up there.

Posted by: fool Jul 11 2006, 07:47 PM

A couple of points- Counterspelling foci (for combat and manipulation spells) are just as important esp. since power foci don't effect counterspelling.
I personally would count casting a spell and resisting drain as a single action and therefore would not allow the spellcasting foci to count towards the drain resistance if using the power focus to cast the spell. I don't recall it saying specifically that you can't do this, but I feel that it would start to break down if you could use both foci.
Alll my mage characters start with a fc 2 power focus. then at least one sustaining focus and maybe a countespelling focus or 2

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 22 2006, 10:14 PM

QUOTE (fool)

It is more efficient to use a fetish instead if worried about drain. For instance a combat fetish is very useful since combat spells have a large drain.

200 nuyen, no BP for binding and yields a +2 to dice pool to resist drain. Downside is that all combat spells have to be cast through the fetish - still it is real efficient, IMO.

By the way spellcasting foci can be used either for spellcasting or resisting drain, but not both. Text on page 191 says "These dice may be used to cast a spell more effectively or withheld to help the magician with Drain." So your personal opinion just happens to agree with the rules as written - gotta love when that happens

Posted by: Jaid Jul 23 2006, 04:15 AM

QUOTE (irdeggman @ Jul 22 2006, 05:14 PM)

By the way spellcasting foci can be used either for spellcasting or resisting drain, but not both. Text on page 191 says "These dice may be used to cast a spell more effectively or withheld to help the magician with Drain." So your personal opinion just happens to agree with the rules as written - gotta love when that happens

no, because the discussion is not about dual spellcasting focii, it is about 1 power focus + 1 spellcasting focus. use the power focus to cast, and the spellcasting focus to resist drain. two separate tests (1 spellcasting test, 1 drain resist test), two separate focii.

RAW, it works just fine.

and considering the cost, i don't see it as being all that unreasonable... instead of force 2 power and spellcasting focii to pull this off in one category, they could instead have 80,000

worth of other gear... that is, they could boot the decker out of the team and take over his job, pretty much. not to mention to BP to bind them could be used for a couple more programs or whatever.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 23 2006, 12:09 PM

QUOTE (Jaid)

QUOTE (irdeggman @ Jul 22 2006, 05:14 PM)

worth of other gear... that is, they could boot the decker out of the team and take over his job, pretty much. not to mention to BP to bind them could be used for a couple more programs or whatever.

I think we are saying the same thing.

And I was refering to fools opinion on using spellcasting foci for both casting and resisting drain (at the same time) - which, as I pointed out his opinion exactly correlates to the rules where the bonus die (from spellcasting focus) can be used for one or the other but not both.

Posted by: Jaid Jul 23 2006, 03:28 PM

QUOTE (irdeggman)

no... as i read it, his objection is to power focus + spellcasting focus, not dual spellcasting focii...

Posted by: fool Jul 23 2006, 11:40 PM

I was objecting to using the power focus to boost your spellcasting dice and the spellcasting focus to boost your drain dice at the same time. It may be RAW to allow that, but in my mind (an unusual place indeed) you can only use one focus when casting a spell, whether you use it to increase your dice for successes or to resist drain doesn't matter; you can only use one focus. (Obviously this doesn't apply when casting a spell into a sustaining focus since the sustaining focus isn't supplementing your dice.)
As far as kicking the hacker out of the team, a mage isn't going to be as good as a decker because of the lack of BP's to get skills with unless they take analyze devise which I think is over powered anyways.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 23 2006, 11:57 PM

QUOTE (fool)

Ahh but they are two different dice pools that use different modifiers.

Spellcasting uses:
Magic + Spellcasting dice

To resist Drain:
Willpower + (Logic or Charisma)

So they are completing different modifiers - which is why a Power Focus doesn't help on resist drain rolls.

The Spellcasting focus rules specifically state the dice modifier can be applied to one or the other. Now why they allowed that combination is beyond me, but it is probably to give more usefulness to the spellcasting focus.

Remember that you can use a fetish also - and that only applies to resisting drain.

Posted by: fool Jul 24 2006, 11:25 PM

yeah I went and looked at the rules last nite, and according to the raw you could use both. I think it's a cheesy w3ay to get around the only one focus rule.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 25 2006, 12:08 AM

I think the rule actually indicates that you cannot use both. Consider that you can "withold dice from your spelcasting pool to use in the drain resistance test." So in order to use a spellcasting focus to assist a drain resistance test you have to add the dice to your spellcasting pool and then withold them in order to use them for drain resistance. However the Power focus adds to your magic directly and therefore is adding dice to the spellcasting pool. Thus you would be adding dice to the same pool from both the power focus and the spellcasting focus, and nix, not allowed.

I'll have to look through the manual again to be sure. But if I were at the table I'd rule that way and require my player to look up evidence to the contrary for future reference.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 25 2006, 02:26 AM

To followup with specifics from the rule book:

QUOTE (Page 191 @ SR4)

Spellcasting foci add their force to a magician's Spellcasting and Ritual Spellcasting dice pools. These dice may be used to cast a spell more effectively or witheld to help the magician with drain.

So my interpretation:

If you have an active power focus it adds directly to your magic, therefore adds directly to your Spellcasting dice pool (Which is Spellcasting + Magic). Before witholding any dice for drain a spellcasting focus applies it's rating in dice to the Spellcasting dice pool, and therefre is incompatable with a power focus.

qed

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 25 2006, 11:27 AM

I don't have my book with me, but isn't the actual rule that you can't apply more than 1 focus towards a single dice pool? or a test?

Not a task or action.

In which case the rules make sense, where the spellcasting focus states you can apply the bonus to one or the other dice pools (but not both)..

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 25 2006, 01:39 PM

The rule is that you can't apply more than one focus to a single dice pool.

The spellcasting focus does not say you can apply the dice to one or the other dice pool, it says exactly what I quoted.

It specifically adds it's force to the spellcasting and ritual spellcasting dice pools, and you may choose to withold them from the pool to allow you to use them to resist drain. It does not give you an option as to which pool to add to, it gives you an option to move the dice from one pool to another.

So it does not matter if it does not say anything about only one focus per "task or action". You cannot get around the fact that a spellcasting focus adds to the spellcasting dicepool and a power focus adds to the same dice pool no matter how you try and justify it. They just are not compatable under the rules, and that is what is intended.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 26 2006, 10:26 AM

So if are "withholding" the dice isn't that the same as "not applying" them?

That is what the question is then - is withholding the same as "not applying"?

Logic dictates that if you withhold something then it is no longer applied.

Hence you can indeed apply power focus to the spellcasting dice pool and the spellccasting focus to the resist drain dice pool and fall completely within the rules since no more than one focus is being applied to a single dice pool.

Unless you are specifically stating that the spellcasting focus applies to both the spellcasting and resist drain dice pools - which is not what the text states.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 26 2006, 01:38 PM

So if your interpretation is correct it does not even need to be a power + Spellcasting it can be just two spellcasting because I'm witholding the dice of one power focus so it's never really adding to the "Spellcasting Pool".

Based on that Faulty logic I could have a magic 6 character with 6 combat spellcasting foci (say rating 6 for example) all bonded and active, and then withold 24 dice (4 foci times 6 each) to add 24 meters to the area of effect of a fireball say. Then still get 6 bonus to drain by witholding those and then 6 bonus dice to the spellcasting test.

So if witholding is like never applying then the intent is obviously missed, so that could not be correct.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 26 2006, 02:07 PM

QUOTE (Demerzel)

So your in your example you are still applying the dice to more than one dice pool right?

Since only 1 focus can be applied to any dice pool at a time - having 4 combat foci will still only allow a single foci to be applied to a single dice pool.

Spellcasting dice pool - apply 1 focus (no matter how many you have available).

Resist drain dice pool - apply only 1 focus (no matter how many are available).

You seem to be saying the having 4 combat foci count as a single focus - which is not what I said, nor is it what the rules state. The rules don't state 1 kind of focus they state one focus.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 26 2006, 02:48 PM

Well what you said is that witholding dice from a pool is like never adding them, allowing you to use a spoellcasting focus for drain where the mechanic required to do that is to add the dice to the spellcasting dicepool then withold them for drain.

Well there is also a mechanic for changing parameters of a spell such as the size of the area of effect that says you can withold a die from the spellcasting pool to allow you to increase or decrease the radius of effect by 1 meter.

Thus where you say that witholding is like never adding them to the pool I can have as many spellcasting foci as I have magic rating apply all their dice to increasing area of effect by witholding those dice from the pool, and thus they never add to the pool and by your interpretation this would not fail the test of not adding more than one foci to a single dice pool.

So in my example the 4 foci used to enhance area never add any dice to any pools because they are all witheld. That example is presented as a counter example to your witholding is like never adding principle.

The purpose is if your mechanic interpretation allows something obviously flawed then your mechanic interpretation must be flawed.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 26 2006, 04:34 PM

QUOTE

Nope the mechanic, as written doesn’t state to add them and then withhold them. That is an interpretation.

The text states:

Text on page 191 says "These dice may be used to cast a spell more effectively or withheld to help the magician with Drain.”

It does not state that they are applied to the spellcasting dice pool and then moved to drain. It is implied that it is an “all or nothing” modification. Since it says “these dice” and the word “or” it doesn’t say these dice add to the pool and then the you can move them to drain. The “rules” you speak about that modify parameters don’t allow moving dice to drain.

QUOTE

Well there is also a mechanic for changing parameters of a spell such as the size of the area of effect that says you can withold a die from the spellcasting pool to allow you to increase or decrease the radius of effect by 1 meter.

Great – but only works for the dice in the spellcasting dice pool (from whatever source they come from).

QUOTE

Thus where you say that witholding is like never adding them to the pool I can have as many spellcasting foci as I have magic rating apply all their dice to increasing area of effect by witholding those dice from the pool, and thus they never add to the pool and by your interpretation this would not fail the test of not adding more than one foci to a single dice pool.

No you can’t. The rule is that only 1 focus may be applied a dice pool at a time. So you can combine 1 spellcasting focus or 1 power focus to the spellcasting dice pool. I never said to violate this rule.

QUOTE

So in my example the 4 foci used to enhance area never add any dice to any pools because they are all witheld. That example is presented as a counter example to your witholding is like never adding principle.

If you never use any of the foci then they have no way to add any die to a dice pool do they? The rules state that only 1 focus may be applied to a dice pool. The rules you have mentioned for enhancing a spell talks about taking dice from the spellcasting pool. Since only 1 focus can be applied to a given pool then everything still works as I have pointed out. A spellcasting focus (under either interpretation) that isn’t applying dice to the spellcasting pool has no effect on enhancement options since there are no additional dice being added to the spellcasting pool because of the focus. I think that is where you example breaks down.

QUOTE

The purpose is if your mechanic interpretation allows something obviously flawed then your mechanic interpretation must be flawed.

I’m sorry but you still haven’t proven that without violating a rule that I stated must be followed (the 1 focus per dice pool rule). You have “changed” that to say they “stack” which is clearly not what the rules were designed for, nor does it reflect anything I have stated so far.

Posted by: 2bit Jul 26 2006, 05:03 PM

So many words... look, the rules aren't crystal but I'd say very clear here:

both from pg. 191:

under Bonding:
"Regardless of the number of foci a magician may possess, only one focus may add its Force to any single dice pool."

under Spell Foci:
"Spellcasting Foci add their force to a magician's Spellcasting and Ritual Spellcasting dice pools. These dice may be used to cast a spell more effectively or withheld to help the magician with Drain."

What is not spelled out completely but is strongly implied here is that 1. The ONLY dice pools which a Spellcasting Foci can add its dice to are the Spellcasting and Ritual Spellcasting pools. After application, the dice may be withheld to help with Drain. "Drain" is not a pool that foci dice can be added to, because no such pool is mentioned in the text under Foci.

Therefore, only one focus can add its dice to the Spellcasting pool at a time, and its dice may be used to cast a spell more effectively or withheld to help with drain.
end of discussion.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 26 2006, 05:42 PM

Thank you 2bit, you see my point, what irdeggman failed to do was read the sentence on page 191 before the one he quoted which I quoted eairler.

"Spellcasting foci add their force to a magician's Spellcasting and Ritual Spellcasting dice pools."

Thats is the sentence before the one you quoted. So they are IN the spellcasting dice pool if you use the focus, regardless what you do with them. But a power focus is in the dicepool too because it adds to any pool in which your magic is involved (Magic + Spellcasting). So before any witholding occurs it violates the no two foci may add their rating to the same pool.

Your claim was that witholding for the drain test means they were never in that pool to begin with. My argument is that if you don't count withheld dice as in a dice pool then it means that witholding dice to alter effects is the same wording, "Witholding" that it follows that you can do the rediculus and use 6 foci for the same spell and that is a clear violation. So your interpretation that the witheld dice were never in the spellcasting pool must be false.

Your quote is fine, and your logic may be valid if it were not for the one sentance before your quote that I put above. You cannot choose to ignore that sentance. In this case it is crystal clear.

A power focus adds its force to any test involving the owners magic. A spellcasting focus adds its force to the spellcasting dice pool. You may not have two foci add their force to the same pool. Power foci is not compatable with spellcasting foci.

Assisting in the drain resistance test requires that the dice be witheld from the spellcasting dice pool. The same way that dice are witheld to alter an area of effect. If you allow your witholding to count then it also by the same logic requires the broken ability to use 6 spellcasting foci on the same spell so long as 4 of them affect area of effect, one spellcating test, one drain resistance test. Obviously your ability to whithold the dice and not have them count as two foci in the spellcasting pool is broken as well.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 26 2006, 05:47 PM

QUOTE (2bit)

What is not spelled out completely but is strongly implied here is that 1. The ONLY dice pools which a Spellcasting Foci can add its dice to are the Spellcasting and Ritual Spellcasting pools. After application, the dice may be withheld to help with Drain. "Drain" is not a pool that foci dice can be added to, because no such pool is mentioned in the text under Foci.

Therefore, only one focus can add its dice to the Spellcasting pool at a time, and its dice may be used to cast a spell more effectively or withheld to help with drain.
end of discussion.

It is that "after application" insertion that will casue problems.

By using those words that means after determining the dice rolls (i.e. resolving the success of the spellcasting) "then" the caster can apply the focus dice to his resist drain roll.

This, IMO, is broken.

The way the words read to me is that the caster may either add the dice to the spellcasting roll or to the resist drain roll.

Resist drain is a dice poll whether or not it is specifically mentioned under foci rules or not.

It is a pool defined by Will power = Logic (or Charisma) and then the "other factors). These other factors include fetishes and the spellcasting focus if not used

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 26 2006, 06:10 PM

It's spelled out exactly, I'm not sure I understand why you don't see that.

The spellcasting focus does one thing and one thing only:

"Spellcasting foci add their force to a magician's Spellcasting and Ritual Spellcasting dice pools."

That is the operative sentance. Now you have some options with the dice that come from the focus. But that does not change what the focus does. Wether you use the dice for drain by witholding the dice or not they are in that pool.

That is where the counter example of AOE spells comes in, if you say witheld dice are never in the pool then you create a contradiction.

If A implies B, and B is false, then A is false.

You imply witholding dice never exist in the original pool. That implies that I can use 4 foci to extend area of effect. That is clearly false so your premise is clearly false.

Posted by: 2bit Jul 26 2006, 07:01 PM

QUOTE (irdeggman)

Yes that's exactly how it works. If you didn't use the focus dice in your spellcasting success test, they are available to use to resist drain. Which is fine, because you have to declare the use of the dice before actually rolling. In my games, I allow the focus dice to be split between success and drain however the player sees fit, but those dice need to be declared beforehand.

Since spell success and drain happen at the same point in game time, you can think of them as one action divided into two tests. Using two foci to cast a spell, or using two foci to Summon a spirit, (one each for success test and drain test) is clearly not what the writers had in mind, and the wording supports this.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 26 2006, 11:47 PM

QUOTE (2bit)

QUOTE (irdeggman @ Jul 26 2006, 12:47 PM)

What I said was that the text you wrote makes it so that the caster rolls all of the dice and then can move whichever ones he wants to since there is no specification on how accomplish this.

Acutally spell success and drain do not strictly happen at the same time. They do happen on the casters turn but they are very specifically different steps int eh spellcasting process.

Pg173-174 goes through all of the stepl sin spellcasting.

Step 5 is determine effect and step 6 is resisting drain. It is just as logical to state that the spellcasting test is made at the same time as determining effect since they are subsequent steps also.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 26 2006, 11:48 PM

Pg 54

“When a player makes a test, she rolls a number of dice equal to her dice pool. The dice pool is the sum of the relevant skill plus its linked attribute, plus or minus any modifier that may apply.”

Pg 174

“Step 6: Resist Drain
Magicians roll Willpower + an attribute appropriate to their tradition (Charisma for shamans and Logic for mages) to resist drain. . . . .Note that wound modifiers or sustained spells have no effect on the character’s dice pool for Drain Resistance Tests.”

So resisting drain is a test and thus has a dice pool.

Pg 191

“Spellcasting foci add their Force to a magician’s Spellcasting and Ritual Spellcasting dice pools. These dice may be used to cast a spell more effectively or withheld to help the magician with drain.”

Instead of changing the text as previously mentioned if the following is done:

“Spellcasting foci add their Force to a magician’s Spellcasting and Ritual Spellcasting dice pools or they may be used for the drain test. These dice may be used to cast a spell more effectively or withheld to help the magician with drain.”

Note by adding these 9 words the intent is clear, the first sentence actually makes sense with the second sentence by actually explaining how withholding dice works (which is consistent with text on pg 173 under area spells when it talks about reducing or expanding the radius of effect. The text functions perfectly within and with all of the other rules for dice pools and tests. No other explanation is required to make the rules fit or further clarify what is meant.

“The caster can reduce or expand the base radius by 1 meter for every die withheld from the Spellcasting Test. Dice expended to change the radius of effect cannot be used in any related test, such as resisting Drain for that spell.”

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 27 2006, 12:39 AM

So the impression I get is that you really want to be able to use a power focus in conjunction with a spellcasting focus, and are willing to change the rules to make it possible?

Basically you want to add text to a clear, and in all likelyhood as intended, rule so as to allow this foci addition that you wish existed?

Consider that your change would allow two spellcasting foci to be used for the same spell, and not just power + spellcasting. That can not be as intended.

QUOTE (irdeggman)

Note by adding these 9 words the intent is clear, the first sentence actually makes sense with the second sentence by actually explaining how withholding dice works

Infact the intent is already clear, by adding those nine words you take the intent and turn it on it's ear and reverse it. Currently the first sentance makes complete sense, and the mechanic of how it works is there.

First it's in the pool, and then you get the option to withold them in order to use them for drain, simple as Pi.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 27 2006, 02:26 AM

QUOTE (Demerzel)

QUOTE (irdeggman)

Note by adding these 9 words the intent is clear, the first sentence actually makes sense with the second sentence by actually explaining how withholding dice works

We'll just have to agree to disagree then

Different dice pools are different dice pools.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 27 2006, 04:15 AM

I think that what really gets me most about this whole thing is, how many posts does it take to get to be a moving target already. Sheesh.

Posted by: 2bit Jul 27 2006, 05:44 PM

Holy crap... I'm going to help bring you to the light if it's the last thing I do.

They use the word "withheld" specifically so that you can only use one focus per spell. They want you to be able to use focus dice for drain, but only at the cost of withholding them from the Sepllcasting test. If you could apply a seperate focus for the drain task, they would have said the focus can add its force to the magician's Drain Pool, not withheld from the Spellcasting attempt to help with drain. One Spell, one Summon, one Binding - ONE FOCUS.

"Summoning foci add their Force in dice to any attempt to Summon the appropriate type of spirit. These dice may be used for the Summoning Test, or they may be withheld to help resist Drain."

"Binding foci add their Force to the magician's Magic + Binding dice pool when binding an appropriate type of spirit, or the extra dice may be withheld to resist Drain."

"Spellcasting foci add their Force to the Magician's Spellcasting and Ritual Spellcasting dice pools. These dice may be used to cast a spell more effectively, or withheld to help the magician with Drain."

You can't apply any of these dice to the Drain Pool. You apply them to the Summoning/Binding/Spellcasting attempt, and then may choose to withhold them before rolling. Withholding is making a tradeoff. You're trading dice from the success test to get more dice on the Drain test. By the same token, you can withhold dice from the success test to get an increase or decrease in spell radius.

Spellcasting foci dice are added to the Spellcasting dice pool because that's the dice pool the book says it can be added to. The Spellcasting dice pool. You get a bonus, though, when it comes time to cast the spell, you can trade dice from the spellcasting test to help resist drain.

QUOTE

What I said was that the text you wrote makes it so that the caster rolls all of the dice and then can move whichever ones he wants to since there is no specification on how accomplish this.

On the contrary, I'm being very clear. When you withhold dice, and this goes for dice withheld to change an AOE spell's radius, you *must* declare how many are being withheld and for what purpose *before* rolling. If you roll all the dice, then all the dice are used and none are left to be withheld, are they!

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 27 2006, 06:12 PM

Heh, 2bit I don't think that he's convincable. I assume he's got a focus addicted character concept he's dying to play rule violation or not. But he seems more willing to change the rule than he is to play by it.

I think the issue at hand is no longer what the rule says or what its designers intend but rather, irdeggman wants it to be a certain way. He believes the game owuld be better if two foci were allowed per spell, and as such he's a perfect cantidate for a house rule.

I think the key to resolution of this conflict is that we need to convince irdeggman that he does not need to seek approval from this forum in order to create a house rule, only the approval of his GM.

If he actually believes that the rule is intended to allow two foci per spell, and that it's an error on the part of the designers, then likewise we cannot help him.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 27 2006, 06:30 PM

Since the two of you don't want to drop this. And I am starting to get tired of the implied insults here - if you check the posts you will find that I never said that "you didn't get it" or that you "want to play rule violation".

I am also not the only person who has gone with my interpretation on this thread (despite the fact that the two of you seem to be implying that).

Then please instead of looking at the text under foci and applying - look for a definition of "withheld" in the rules and what that constitutes.

The only place I can find it is under the expanding a spell radius section.

“The caster can reduce or expand the base radius by 1 meter for every die withheld from the Spellcasting Test. Dice expended to change the radius of effect cannot be used in any related test, such as resisting Drain for that spell.”

Now under pretty much any definition of contributions to dice pools I can find - if the dice don't count towards a test then they aren't "applied".

What does Withheld mean?

Oh and for the recod my Mystic Adept has a force 2 power focus and force 3 sustaining focus (for his Increased relfexes spell) and 2 pp worth of adept abilities with a magic rating of 5 and spellcasting 5 (combat) with a combat fetish.

So I am pretty sure that no matter how you read the rules or define withheld that my PC is not illegal in any way.
So

Posted by: 2bit Jul 27 2006, 07:01 PM

Well if you think we're insulting then we'll never convince you. Please reread the sections on spellcasting and foci. Every time you use two foci to cast a spell, you make the developers cry.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Jul 27 2006, 09:38 PM

QUOTE

The only place I can find it is under the expanding a spell radius section.

“The caster can reduce or expand the base radius by 1 meter for every die withheld from the Spellcasting Test. Dice expended to change the radius of effect cannot be used in any related test, such as resisting Drain for that spell.”

Now under pretty much any definition of contributions to dice pools I can find - if the dice don't count towards a test then they aren't "applied".

What does Withheld mean?

In the case of AoE you are specifically withholding the dice to increase/decrease the size of the spell. Whereas with the focus, according to its own rules allows you to withhold the bonus dice from your spellcasting test in order to be used for the drain. You cann't use those dice on both, nor can you use the power focus for bonus dice AND the spellcasting to help resist drain at the same time. You can only cast a spell through one Focus.

<edit> almost forgot, Withheld means that you DO NOT ROLL THEM.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 27 2006, 09:54 PM

QUOTE (X-Kalibur)

[QUOTE]
You can only cast a spell through one Focus.

So you can't use a spellcasting or a power focus and a sustaining one then?

I mean you did say you can't cast a spell through 2 foci at the same time.

Posted by: X-Kalibur Jul 27 2006, 10:06 PM

QUOTE (irdeggman)

[QUOTE=X-Kalibur,Jul 27 2006, 04:38 PM] [QUOTE]
You can only cast a spell through one Focus.
[/QUOTE]
So you can't use a spellcasting or a power focus and a sustaining one then?

I mean you did say you can't cast a spell through 2 foci at the same time.

Unless you can point me to where it says you use a power or spellcasting conjunction with a sustaining, then no, you cannot use both to my knowledge. Unless you are able to casting a sustaining spell, and then transfer it into a focus after it has been cast.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 27 2006, 10:35 PM

As it stands I don't believe any rule prohibits the use of a sustaining focus with either a spellcasting or power focus. To my knowledge the only rule that prevents multiple foci is the rule that no two foci may add their force to a single dice pool.

I don't believe you can transfer a sustained spell to the sustaining focus however, the description as I recall it indicates that you declare the sustaining focus at time of casting. I'll check the book when I get home and see about it, but I'm pretty sure that's the description.

Posted by: 2bit Jul 27 2006, 11:25 PM

that's right Demerzel

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 27 2006, 11:41 PM

QUOTE (2bit)

that's right Demerzel

Ah! That's all I ask, say that once and a while! Make me feel good.

Posted by: fool Jul 28 2006, 01:24 AM

you're right demerzel, but I said it much earlier. Then waffled.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 28 2006, 01:28 AM

pg 191

"Sustaining Foci are unusual in that they do not add any dice to a test. Instead, a magician may cast a spell through a sustaining foci and the focus will sustain the spell for him. A spell sustained by such a focus does not inflict a dice pool modifier for sustaining the spell. A spell sustained by a sustainng focus cannot have a Force greater that that of the focus. If a spell sustained by a focus is disrupted, it ends; the focus is still bound to its master and she may use it to sustain another spell."

{You gotta love the editing in this book - they can't even keep the genders straight within the same paragraph - one time the magician is a "he" and then the next the magician is a "she". No wonder there is such confusion over the rules }

The rule on using more than one foci for a spell is on pg 191 under "bonding"

"Regardless of the number of foci a magician may posses, only one focus may add its Force to any single dice pool."

And I still say that when you withhold dice from a dice pool you are no longer adding the focus' Force to the spell. And that is the point of contention in this disagreement.

Posted by: Dr Genoa Jul 28 2006, 02:10 AM

Tell me I am dumb but I thought that power foci increased your effective force level where as spellcasting foci increase the dice pool for certain casting tests.

My example being a Shaman has Magic five with a force 3 power foci thus making his effective magic 8 when the foci is on. That is how it was used in our game and how I believe it is written in the book.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 28 2006, 03:58 AM

Well, the rule for the power focus is:

QUOTE (Page 192)

Possession of a power focus feeds a magician's Magic directly, making her efforts more powerful in all forms of magical ability. A power focus adds its Force to all tests in which the magician's Magic is included.

So arguably the new rule is that it only adds dice to any roll that Magic is involved in and does not increase your MAgic attribute. That is probably the correct interpretation, as it prevents someone from taking the Mystic Adept quality and being just as powerful a caster as any regular Magician. So you cannot take a Magic of 3 for spellcasting and two powerpoints of adept abilities, then use a power focus to offset the 2 missing points of Magic.

Personally I'm not sure how I'd rule on this in a game I'm GMing. I understand why the developers would want to require Mystical adepts to limit their Magic rating. A 3 in magic rating makes your max force on a spell 6, and anything over 3 is physical drain. A serious limitation. A mere 12 build points gets you a force 2 power focus and suddenly you can cast with a magic of 5 and that's a pretty big difference!

I'm still struggling with deciding if I prefer the old adding to magic as in SR3- or this new way.

As far as the gender thing goes:

Some RPGs have wierd gendered pronoun policies. It's possible here that FanPro switches genders every use of the gendered pronouns barring the cases where imidiate correlations is necessary for clarity. It's hard to please people in this respect, I remember a time when exclusive use of the male pronouns got TSR in troubble. I think starting with the "Complete Handbook of X" line TSR started switching genders on every book. So for example, the complete handbook on elves was entirely in the female, then the next was entirely int he male. Here I think FanPro probably has a requirement that they alternate frequently.

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 28 2006, 10:07 AM

QUOTE (Demerzel)

Well, the rule for the power focus is:

[QUOTE=Page 192]
As far as the gender thing goes:

Some RPGs have wierd gendered pronoun policies. It's possible here that FanPro switches genders every use of the gendered pronouns barring the cases where imidiate correlations is necessary for clarity. It's hard to please people in this respect, I remember a time when exclusive use of the male pronouns got TSR in troubble. I think starting with the "Complete Handbook of X" line TSR started switching genders on every book. So for example, the complete handbook on elves was entirely in the female, then the next was entirely int he male. Here I think FanPro probably has a requirement that they alternate frequently.

I don't have problems with changing gender when talking about different things like under elves making it male and under dwarves making it female.

The point I was making was that this occurred within the same paragraph while talking about the same character. I know that a lot of things can be done with bioware and cyberware but. . . . .

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 28 2006, 10:25 AM

QUOTE (Dr Genoa)

No you are not dumb, a lot of times it requires some serious looking (and page turning) to figure out the rules.

I believe that Derezel has this mostly correct (except for the part about limiting mystic adept's magic rating (since neither pp nor power focus affect the "rating" itself - only the dice pools). A force foci adds to the Magic dice pool, this is not an increase in the magic rating (e.g., force of a spell).

I am running a Mystic Adept with a 5 Magic and 2 pp in powers.

I had originally misread the rules on what the pp does to the magic and thought I needed to acquire a Power focus in order to restore the Force of my spells.

This is actually incorrect - the result of the pp is to reduce the number of dice rolled for magic rolls but not to change the magic rating.

The same logic would apply to a power focus - since the text between the two is remarkably similar.

So my mystic adept has a force 2 power focus. What this does is to give me back the 2 dice I "lost" for all tests except counterspelling tests (to counter an active casting only).

Your Shaman has a max force of 5 for spells and can roll 8 dice from his magic rating and his power focus - but still can only have 5 "successes" since the number of successes is limited by the force of the spell.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 28 2006, 03:22 PM

Yea, that's actually a decent change to mystical adepts. My previous understanding was probably a hold over from SR3- where adepts had to use a lwoer magic number.

One thing is that the actual spell cap is 2x Magic not Magic. You just face physical drain for overcasting.

Which got me thinking, is it ever advantageous to overcast? Heal spell works on physical drain, but stun is unhealable.

If I'm magic 5, cast a (F/2)+2 [some manipulation for example] spell at force 7, I resist 5p drain. Assume I soak 3 down to 2 physical, then throw a force 3 heal spell, get three successes and use one to lower my time to make permanent. Then wham, I'm only taking heal drain from a force 3, so 1+ heal drain modifier... (Which I don't have off the top of my head). And in the end I'm only taking like 2S or 3S and I'm fine.

However if the original was at force 5 I soak 4S and maybe 4 hits on that test is way harder than the 3 I assumed.. Hummn... You'd have to have a pretty messed up character concept to choose a deal where the caster chooses to take physical damage a lot... Some mental issue like a cutter...

Posted by: irdeggman Jul 28 2006, 03:44 PM

But you'd lose precious actions by casting heal on yourself - plus any potential dice pool modifiers for being stunned from the spells previously cast would affect the spellcasting check for the heal spell.

I try not to use the overcasting bit. Physical damage, just seems to be a risky thing to willingly take on a routine basis. Now for those times when you absolutely have to deal it out that is what I envision overcasting is about.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 28 2006, 04:14 PM

Yea, but in those cases where the actions don't matter is where overcasting in the current rules is oddly attractive. Which is those cases where you don't absolutely have to deal it out, and can take those extra actions.

Posted by: ThreeGee Jul 28 2006, 06:33 PM

In the right situation, overcasting a Stunball can be a melee breaker in SR4, the sammies then just have to mop up while the mage Heals himself.

Posted by: Mr. Unpronounceable Jul 28 2006, 06:54 PM

QUOTE (Demerzel)

Which got me thinking, is it ever advantageous to overcast? Heal spell works on physical drain, but stun is unhealable.

Sure it can be advantageous to overcast, even without healing

Ex: overcasting stunbolt at say, force 10 (drain f/2-1 = 4) will almost certainly (barring extremes of luck) drop any one opponent, assuming no counterspelling.

And while you may take a box or two of physical damage, consider if your opponent was an orc or troll with an assault rifle, that should be much preferred to him getting 2 or 3 more initiative passes to throw burst fire your way, so you're much better off.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 28 2006, 08:21 PM

I mean froma pure drain perspective. PErhaps adding 1 to the force to make it physical means you're better off purely in the drain sense...

Posted by: Mr. Unpronounceable Jul 28 2006, 09:10 PM

In that case, maybe if you're a dwarf/orc/troll and have those free body points / additional physical damage boxes.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 28 2006, 10:07 PM

So here's an example of someone taking physical drain on purpose just because he can. I know this is a little silly, but that's my point.

Mr Mage has:
Wil 5
Log 4
Mag 5
Spellcasting 5

He starts out with no damage at all.

Casts a spell with drain (F/2) + 2

If at force 5, it’s 4s, he has 9 dice to resist drain and succeeds on 1/3 of them so he takes 1s. In one hour of complete rest he’s back at zero damage.

If at force 6, it’s 5p, same 3 hits on drain resistance so he bleeds a little and takes 2p. So he casts heal (2p no modifiers) at force 3. 9 dice gets 3 successes on average. He spends 2 of the hits to heal the 2 boxes and the other hit to reduce the time of sustaining by 1 turn to make permanent. I don’t recall off the top of my head drain on Heal, but I’m sure it’s at worst (F/2) + 2, so that’s 3s drain, and he averages 3 hits on drain resistance, so no prob. (On average) So after a few (3 or 4?) combat turns he’s back at zero boxes.

So which was better from start to finish, 1 hour or less than 15 seconds?

Posted by: fool Jul 29 2006, 09:31 PM

a couple of small points.
1 in another thread people were talking about making a house rule that you scouldn't use heal on drain damage for just this reason.
2 1/3 successes may be average, but bad luck happens, that's why we use dice.
3 in sr3 your magic rating made a difference as to things like the area of the spell, so adding directly to m rating was a big boost. Now, it's less so in sr4 so only adding dice makes it more consistent with other foci
4 saying it takes alot of page turning to figure out these rules is an uinderstatement. I figure I'll finally uinderstand the matrix rules about when sr5 is out.

Posted by: Demerzel Jul 29 2006, 11:00 PM

I'm less inclined to house rule that drain physicial is unhealable for this possible exploit. But I think anyone who purposefully does that to themselves repeatadely would have to be a little on the messed up side and I'd probably impose something pretty harsh on him.

I think that's probably one of the keys to the rules, no matter how exploitable they are it'll come down to the GM's ability to mitigate exploits. And that is why MMORPGs have so many flaws, it's impossible to invent a ruleset that's perfectly lacking in exploitability, and a MMORPG can't have GMs watching and making decisions like a real GM does in a table top RPG.

I think a lot of the mechanics issues are better left and the GM can work with them, than trying to burden the ruleset with a serious addition of unexploitability code. After all this is not a game run by a machine, the unexploitability code is "final GM approval".