Making your own foci Options

[Boomer1985]

So i started looking into making a power foci for my character i wanted it at R4 but the 100k price tag was a little steep. But now looking at the rules for making one why wouldnt you just by buying hits it would take me 25 days to make this foci and just at the cost of the mats for the telesma.

So why would you buy one instead of making it yourself

[Summerstorm]

Because the rules are not good. The creation should cost more karma. I mean ONE point, no matter how powerful... is just weird.

But you also need to have the shop, and a good gm would need you to have rare and exotic ingredients, or base an "adventure", not really a run, around it.

But yeah if you follow the rules and have the equipment/skills... it is easy to do IF you got the downtime.

[Yerameyahu]

A focus.

Researching a focus formula is an Arcana + Magic (Force x Force, 1 day) Extended Test; or you can buy it (10k¥, Avail 32R). And, you're prolly going to be using Diminishing Pool rules for the Extended Test: "Gamemasters may wish to enforce the limit on Extended Tests to preserve game balance." Who invests in Arcana, anyway?

Most people don't invest in the Enchanting skill, which is linked to Magic (so you'll need to be pretty decent at both). The Enchanting Modifiers table is pulling you back by -Force off the bat, so you'll want decent (pricey) telesma/reagents/orich.

25 days is a long time, anyway. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Mercer]

If you have invested in Arcana, it's probably easier to make a focus formula than find one with a 32 Availability. I mean, if I reading this correctly, assume a 1 Arcana and a 6 Magic for 7 dice needing 16 hits for a Rating 4 versus the 32 hits needed on the Negotiation+CHA test-- quicker too, with 1 day per test to make, 2 days per test to find.

[Yerameyahu]

It depends on the Extended test rules you're using. As I said, the book suggests the GM bring the pain. Still, 6 Magic isn't nothing.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

If you have invested in Arcana, it's probably easier to make a focus formula than find one with a 32 Availability. I mean, if I reading this correctly, assume a 1 Arcana and a 6 Magic for 7 dice needing 16 hits for a Rating 4 versus the 32 hits needed on the Negotiation+CHA test-- quicker too, with 1 day per test to make, 2 days per test to find.

Don't forget that creating the Focus Formula is a requirement before manufacturing the Focus (unless you just buy the formula). I see you mentioned that already.
And Arcana is not linked to Magic, it is linked to Logic. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Enchanting is linked to Magic.
So 2 Attributes at good levels and 2 skills at good levels. Completely seperate from your casting and summoning skills no less. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Don't forget your reagents and exotic telesma components. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

And reducing pools is not your friend here. But is likely to be enforced. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Yerameyahu]

I copied Arcana+Magic from the book. *shrug* Either way.

[Boomer1985]

Yeah couple thousand for reagents for the telesma vs 100k for the foci is worth it and since im not in missions we arent dealing w/ diminishing dice pools

[Yerameyahu]

It's not a Missions rule, but it's your GM's funeral if he lets you get away with stuff. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Several weeks (did you remember the formula?) is still not nothing, even assuming you just happen to have all the relevant skills, materials, and luck. Don't forget to find and rent an enchanting shop for the duration, or buy one (50k), and the magical lodge, etc.

[pbangarth]

And the 1 karma investment is for the making, not for the binding.

[Bigity]

And the 1 karma investment is for the making, not for the binding.

This.

[Irion]

@pbangarth
Which kind of sucks, but one karma for 100k of cash is still not a bad deal. And thinking about how very usefull the skills of arcana and enchantment are...

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein

And Arcana is not linked to Magic, it is linked to Logic.

Was changed as far as I know.
@Yerameyahu

Researching a focus formula is an Arcana + Magic (Force x Force, 1 day) Extended Test; or you can buy it (10k¥, Avail 32R). And, you're prolly going to be using Diminishing Pool rules for the Extended Test: "Gamemasters may wish to enforce the limit on Extended Tests to preserve game balance." Who invests in Arcana, anyway?

Arcana and enchanting are classic support-skills. Need to keep your head down but you want Spell X? Make it yourself.

[Midas]

Arcana and Enchanting are skills that a lot of mages (esp mages posted on DS) skimp on; allowing those that have invested in those skills to use them to create foci is more than fair enough.

Remember that creating the formula and enchanting the focus take time and materials (a lodge, enchanting shop, materials for the focus), and as Yerameyahu says a good GM will probably require rare and hard to get materials to make a powerful focus.

[The Jake]

I'd so love to learn these skills but Logic is a dumpstat for my character. Unless I get my GM to swing the optional rule which allows you to tie that skill to my casting attribute, I'll never invest XP into it.

- J.

[toturi]

Arcana and Enchanting are skills that a lot of mages (esp mages posted on DS) skimp on; allowing those that have invested in those skills to use them to create foci is more than fair enough.

We do not often see mages with Logic as the Drain stat. Many a time the drain stat tend to be Charisma. IMO, a Charisma drain caster would be better served by simply buying the foci.

[NiL_FisK_Urd]

Any caster is better off just buying the focus - investing karma in enchanting and arcana for saving a few bucks on the focus? buying foci, conjuring materials and lifestyle is the only things mages do with money, whereas they need karma for everything else.

[Irion]

@NiL_FisK_Urd
Up to the second you get yourself a Karma for cash rule. At this point saving 100k means (if we would assume 5k per point of Karma) saving 15 Karma. (Assuming you need 20k for raw materials)

But thats just for logic based casters,sure. (Probably having logic 8 to begin with and getting adding a skill of 3-4)
If your logic is around 2, well you better stop thinking about it...

And of course the helpfullness of such skill is very depending on how your GM is handeling things in game.
I am not talking about letting you sell refined materials list price, that would be stupid.
But maybe one of your contact is in desprete need for orichalcum and asks the character. (So you get Karma and maybe some gift for fulfilling this request.)

[bibliophile20]

After trying to calculate out the earnings of one of my NPCs (one of the PCs took Perfect Roommate, so I ended up building an enchanter boyfriend), I ended up just working out about a page's worth of houserules for enchanting. In particular, I reworked the foci enchanting test to "Enchanting a focus is an Enchanting + Magic (8+Karma Bonding Multiplier+Object Resistance, 1 Day) test." and also reworked the modifiers table a bit to suit. Yes, it's a lower threshold for most foci, but I use the diminishing dice pool rule by default, so this makes crafting lower powered foci within the realm of possibility for average enchanters, while reserving the potent, like power foci or monofilament whip weapon foci ((IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) ), for the skilled.

[Irion]

@bibliophile20
And it leaves out the Force.

Rules to make crafting work:
First: Reduce the prices for refined and radical materials. They are just silly.
Something like that.
"refined"= 1000+1.10*"normal"
"radical"= 2000+1.20*"normal"
Second
Get the limits up for enchanting foci and now Orichalcum should do shit.

Crafting a focus is an Enchanting + Magic (6 + Object
Resistance+karma needed to bind the focus , 1 day)

Now lets take a look at the modifier table(only changes):
Exotic Telesma: +8
(Force) Radical Reagents of one type: +1 per 5k of worth(every reagent only once, add worth before dividing)
Orichalcum, per unit: +8 (with at least one onit, save the one point of Karma, every 4 above the first 1 Point on the binding test)

To build one powerfocus you should at least use one portion of orichalcum.

Example: The avarage talismonger tries to create a focus:
The so much liked powerfocus, force 4.
He takes a Handmade Telesma and uses 1 unit of radical gold and one unit orichalcum.
His dice pool: Attribute(5)+Skill(4)+8(orichalcum)+3(15k for radical gold)-Force=8+11-4=16
Hits needed: 6+ 2(something around wood or metal)+ 32(Karma to bind it)=40
Kosts: 50k(orichalcum)+15k gold
(Lets say he rolls always avarage, round down)
1. Roll: 5 hits
2. Roll: 5 hits
3. Roll: 4 hits
4. Roll: 4 Hits
5. Roll: 4 Hits
6. Roll: 3 Hits (Dicepool 11, hits: 29)
7. Roll: 3 Hits
8: Roll: 3 Hits
9: Roll: 2 Hits
10. Roll: 2 Hits (Dicepool 7, hits 39)
11. Roll: 2 Hits (41 made it)

So our guy could cash around 30k for 11 days of work. Thats quite a good deal. Might want to increase some things...
(There are some tricks to give him a edge though...)

And Orichalcum:
Now takes two of each radical metal and throws out 5 units max not 8.
Allowing a profit here of around 200k. Not 350k.
28 days of work (meaning it is better than enchanting foci, but you won't get the full profit all the time and you need to be quite good to get anything. Might make it a higher threshold or give one unit per two net hits, round up.)

[3278]

It depends on the Extended test rules you're using. As I said, the book suggests the GM bring the pain.

I was under the impression that the default was to "assume that given enough time a competent character will eventually complete a given task," and that the book suggests the GM bring the pain only when "the character can’t finish it with a certain amount of effort" because "she simply doesn’t have the skills to complete it." Why would the "bring the pain" version of the Extended Test rules apply to this situation?

[Yerameyahu]

… Cuz it specifically says to, as I quoted? That's what quotes and 'as the book suggests' mean. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[3278]

… Cuz it specifically says to, as I quoted? That's what quotes and 'as the book suggests' mean. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Yeah, thanks, I missed the earlier quote, but it only suggests, "GMs may wish to enforce the limit on Extended Tests to preserve game balance," [emphasis mine] and I guess I'm having trouble figuring out why that applies in this situation.

[Irion]

@3278
Very simple:
The reduction of the dicepool should always apply if you need "skill" to complete a task.
It should not apply, if it is only a question of time.

For example:
Urok the Garden Troll is digging a big hole to plant a tree. The bigger the tree the more Urok has to dig. But Urok will be able to plant the tree, the question is WHEN
->Bring the pain does NOT apply

Grolosh the hacker Dwarf wants to write a program raiting 6. As the the program grows more and more complex, the difficulty for Grolosh rises. It is questionable if he will be able to complete it.
->Bring the pain DOES apply.

What have we here? Is it as easy to enchant a force 2 sustaining foci as it is to enchant a force 8 Powerfocus? We do not know, but I would assume so.
This means a enchanting a force 8 powerfocus is not the same as enchanting 4 force 2 powerfoci.
This means, that the "bring the pain rule" applys.

How to easy test if the rule is to be used.
Can you cut down the process in small, repeating steps? The rule does not apply.
For example our troll may just dig out one shovel full of earth. He is repeating this step. The rule does not apply.
Our hacker can't just keep writing the same code over and over again. It would not accomplish anything. So the rule applys.

A questionable case is a mage pressing through earth.
It is a step by step form of application but it adds the problem of getting lost.
So it is not the same to press through 10 times 1m thick walls compared to press through one 1 Meter thick wall.
So you may bring the pain or make some composure test or something like that.

[Yerameyahu]

*shrug* That's up to the GM, 3278, but when the OP says, 'are foci really this easy to make?!!', that's a clue that game balance may be involved. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif) If it's too good to be true, it's not true.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

@Tymeaus Jalynsfein

Was changed as far as I know.

Nope. A Mundane can use the Arcana Skill. No Magic is actually required.