In you campaign do you give details to your magical toys like spell focus and power focus etc or are they just trinkets?

In the 2nd Ed story the street sam 'Nameless' refers to them looking like road kill. In Mercurial there is a reference to broaches looknig like magical design. But do you or your GM not bother beyond this or is it detailed to the point you have your (To use tyhe Dresden Files as an example) a Shield bracelet, Blasting rod etc.

I tend to name EVERY focus in the game and give them a unique name and history. They represent a lot of time and energy and almost no too are the same. The corporate ones do tend to have a brand name; but even then they have some sort of unique name.

I've always defined things by the details of their properties, so pretty much anything of note has that sort of information behind it. No matter what it is, if the character has it, it's got some semblance of a description. The more important the item, the more thorough the description.

As a GM, I'm obsessive about little details. Case in point, the players get their hands on four Ruger Thunderbolts. Each gun has a history, explaining why it's not in the hands of a Lone Star officer, and where it has traveled along the way. Extraction targets have neighbors. Fixers have families. Bodyguards have favorite music. I don't like to gloss over anything if I don't have to.

I do that too, I guess thats what I mean when I run a photo realistic game. Sometimes players think that it's annoying, but it does help them on occasion. During a stakeout they had to listen to a nearby guard listen to a new girl pop band album over and over. Drove them nuts until the 2 nights before the run. 2 backstage tickets to the pop girls concert and that guard was hading over schedules and access codes like you wouldn't believe. They even shot him in the arm so that he wouldn't get blamed and so he could make sure he made the show.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)

"Yeah, right there. I won't bleed to death but I can get off work."

BANG

"You guys are awesome!"

Thats pretty close. I think the guy had second thoughts though and the sam said "Don't worry, chicks dig scars." Then shot him.

Most of the people I play under tend to only add detail to important items, which I hate, because then you automatically know something is important. I try not to do that when I run games, but the players are so used to it they assume it is important. I once made the mistake of giving a back alley a sewer hatch in my description and nothing would do except for them to slog through the sewers expecting the bad guys to have a lair or something down there. (Someone had been dragged out the back and kidnapped- had they taken the time to search the alley they would have found tire tracks in the muck, but noooo they had to spend most of the session figuring out what they would want and buying anti-bacterials, antivirals, and in one players case a full on sealed chem suit so they could clomp through the sewers safe from disease. After they spent all that prep time, I threw in a scavenging ghoul at the end of a mile or so hike just to have something happen that session. Also, slightly to punish them, he had a shitty armor jacket, and a crappy machine pistol packing flechette ammo that shredded the one characters sealed chem suit(bastard was the reason for the whole ordeal and took soooo long deciding what he wanted to buy and where and how and when they should go in. Drove me nuts. Also, he was a troll and in front, the flechette was the only punishment part.)

Grrrr...

Chris

I'm pretty minimalist when it comes to GMing. Because I, personally, get bored with excessive amounts of detail, I provide enough information that the players can get a good mental image and just let it go at that. If they want more detail, I provide it on a case by case basis.

So, if they runners looted the body of a hermetic security mage and found a power focus, I'd describe it as something appropriately hermetic, unless there was some reason for it to look like it was from another tradition (like, the mage took it from someone else). For instance, a gold lapel pin, set with a diamond, and etched with tiny hermetic symbols around the setting.

Now... In D&D (or similar settings) where rapid production of durable magical items (weapons, armor, etc.) isn't practical, I go into more detail. Every durable item item has a little history, even if its just a short paragraph, a description, and a name. It'll also bear the mark of its maker, which can be very helpful in identifying items.

For instance, there was a sword making magician in one of my friend's games made it his life's work to make as many magical swords as possible. Of course, they were all +1 long or short swords... Finding his mark on an item was an almost 100% guarantee of knowing what the item was. I pilfered the idea for my old D&D game, but never really got to introduce him or his creations to the players.

-paws

Foci are like tattoos. Every one of them has a story.

Sometimes that story is just "I had some extra money and decided to dermally scar myself.", but it's still a story.

i make them something thay can't be stolen from me. riveted metal bracelet, arm or ankle. tattoos, things i can have inserted into my chest cavity without medical compilations.

my GM has a history of taking things you don't keep a tight enough hold on, or protect had enough.

"So, where are your Foci?" "I had them surgically implanted into me."

"Hey, baby is that a gun in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?"
"Actually, its my power focus."
"Oh, I like it when guys name their *giggle* tools."

I think the level of detail depends on the GM/player. I personally like the little details that flesh everything out. More background gives more opportunity for my players to connect with NPCs, do side quests, etc.