Limited Spells after learning?, also critter questions Options

[mmmkay]

Is it possible to attune to a fetish after learning a spell without limitation?

I'm asking because I was tossing around the idea of an awakened pet with the innate spell ability. So clearly when you get the pet they innately know a spell, so I figure they wouldn't be able to relearn a limited version of the same spell to benefit from a fetish?

Similarly running wild didn't explicitly mention teaching an animal to specialize or increase attributes, so would either of those be impossible? I'm leaning towards specialization is possible and of moderate complexity (if it is a natural skill), but I suspect increasing attributes is unreasonable because then it somewhat negates the value of warforms.

[HunterHerne]

Is it possible to attune to a fetish after learning a spell without limitation?

I'm asking because I was tossing around the idea of an awakened pet with the innate spell ability. So clearly when you get the pet they innately know a spell, so I figure they wouldn't be able to relearn a limited version of the same spell to benefit from a fetish?

Similarly running wild didn't explicitly mention teaching an animal to specialize or increase attributes, so would either of those be impossible? I'm leaning towards specialization is possible and of moderate complexity (if it is a natural skill), but I suspect increasing attributes is unreasonable because then it somewhat negates the value of warforms.

The way I read it, is that it is possible to increase attributes the same way skills can be increased, by a maximum of 2 above what is available. This would apply to Warforms, as well, as the increased attribute of the warform could be "trained" higher beyond.
I don't think specialization should be possible for non-sapient animals. It implies that animals can focus on training something, which they can't, by definition, even if forced.

[Dahrken]

Is it possible to attune to a fetish after learning a spell without limitation?

I don't think so as the fetish-linked spell is a different spell from the non-fetish spell of the same name and effect.

[Yerameyahu]

Ignoring all questions of animals learning spells and attributes… pets can't use foci in the first place, right? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[HunterHerne]

Ignoring all questions of animals learning spells and attributes… pets can't use foci in the first place, right? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

This is true. Nor fetishes (though I guess an argument could be made for dog collars... not a good argument, but an argument)

[mmmkay]

Ignoring all questions of animals learning spells and attributes… pets can't use foci in the first place, right? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Not sure about this first place business as foci and fetishes are different. And most critters cannot bond to foci because they are not magicians. The only reason fetishes seem to not work is that critters don't seem to learn spells they just know them innately (for the most part). Some exceptions include oracle owls who can upon gamemaster discretion can perform any detection spell and the merlin hawk which can cast any detection or illusion spell. Running wild gives no indication that critters can learn spells, which makes sense.

[Yerameyahu]

*shrug* Foci, fetishes; either way, you have to be a magician and consciously attune them, which just isn't something an animal can do.

[mmmkay]

*shrug* Foci, fetishes; either way, you have to be a magician and consciously attune them, which just isn't something an animal can do.

Where does it say that fetishes require you to be a magician? Evidence or it didn't happen.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I would think that this is sufficient...

Foci are magic items, astral constructs embedded within physical objects. Foci act as pools of power that a magician can draw on to help accomplish a magical task. A focus must be bound to a magician before it can be of any assistance to him.

[mmmkay]

I would think that this is sufficient...

Fetishes are not foci, but since TJ and I cannot read: "When learning a spell, a magician may choose to accept limitations... "(p.182 SR4a)

[Yerameyahu]

Glad you found it. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) Foci and fetishes, while not the same thing, are definitely in the same category of 'conscious, bonded magical aids'.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Fetishes are not foci, but since TJ and I cannot read: "When learning a spell, a magician may choose to accept limitations... "(p.182 SR4a)

I was referring specifically to Foci, as Fetishes are pretty self explanatory, as you point out. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[TheOOB]

Don't think of it as attuning to a fetish for a bonus, think of it as a magician learning an easier version of a spell that requires a certain fetish in order to cast.

Anything that uses magic innately isn't going to need accessories to use their abilities.