Foci size Options

[Machiavelli]

Horrido Dumpshockers,

Just a quick question: in our last run i ordered a force 6 power foci and wanted the talismonger to create a custom made special shape (net-like), so that i can either implant it around a bone or put it into carvings on my horns. But he refused with the explanation, that a force 6 focus is too big for such a thing. Now he is doin´t a quite big amulett for me (i had to complain a lot, to avoid getting a big gandalf-like magic-wand). I was a bit surprised, because i never heard of a force to size ratio, but mybe i have overread something?

[Sendaz]

They say Gandalf had a big staff AND knew how to use it.

That demon of shadow and flame? His ex. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)


But seriously, your GM may be thinking of the units of radicals reagents or orichalcum needed for making a focus which is equal to the force of the focus, so in this case 6 units.

If I remember right 1 unit of orichalcum weighs 10 grams so not really that big when you are talking metals. The radical reagents will vary in weight depending on their source I suppose or they may be bulkier than nice dense orichalcum.

Still should be able to work something out by just talking to him.

[sk8bcn]

I would say no but for another reason. Technically, you must touch the focus to activate/desactivate a focus. While having in into a bone implemented could be considered as touching it, I would say that it goes against the spirit of the thing.

I would thus say that you can, but you be nearly like dual natured and unable to desactivate it.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

I would say no but for another reason. Technically, you must touch the focus to activate/desactivate a focus. While having in into a bone implemented could be considered as touching it, I would say that it goes against the spirit of the thing.

I would thus say that you can, but you be nearly like dual natured and unable to desactivate it.

Why? If you are in contact with it to activate it, why would you not be in contact with it to deactivate it?

[Sendaz]

*cough* Frosty *cough*

Frosty's whole femur wasn't replaced, it was just a special focus wrapped around the bone, something of a tracking and/or protective device.

[KarmaInferno]

It needs to be huge to contain it's immense power.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

But seriously, the size of the end-product focus is not really defined in the rules, so it's up to your GM.



-k

[PraetorGradivus]

I would say no but for another reason. Technically, you must touch the focus to activate/desactivate a focus. While having in into a bone implemented could be considered as touching it, I would say that it goes against the spirit of the thing.

I would thus say that you can, but you be nearly like dual natured and unable to desactivate it.

Tattoo foci are embedded in the skin and can be activated/deactivated.

By extension, why would a foci that's embedded in your horns not be able to do the same?

Now, if the foci the poster is talking about is a weapon foci, that's a whole different discussion.

[Deckbeard]

As I run my game, the end product can pretty much be as big as you want within reason. No, you may not have a foci the size of an atom it the Empire States building. One of my players has a beast summoning focus that's a crows skull with inscriptions made of orichelcium. 3 drams of reagents would probably not fit on a crow's skull but the way I see it is that all the other stuff is used in the preparation of if. Like burning oricelcum sparklers or whatever. Long story short, long as you actually use all the reagents then it DOSNT really matter what the item is.

[Deckbeard]

By extension, why would a foci that's embedded in your horns not be able to do the same?

Now, if the foci the poster is talking about is a weapon foci, that's a whole different discussion.

Oh man. Now I really want to make a troll physadept with his horns being a pair of weapon foci.

[PraetorGradivus]

Oh man. Now I really want to make a troll physadept with his horns being a pair of weapon foci.

Assuming the GM allows it...it would have to be a Minotaur or a changeling Troll with Goring Horns as normal Troll horns aren't weapons.

If you were to headbutt someone with normal Troll horns it's the Unarmed Combat skill.

BTW, many people feel that regardless of Goring horns using the Exotic Weapon skill is still an 'unarmed' attack.
Those same people are split into the you can use things like killing strike/elemental strike because it's 'unarmed' and those people who say you can't use those powers either since it doesn't use Unarmed Combat skill.

But this is a separate question from what the poster asked and so we should get back to that if anyone else has something further to add.

[SpellBinder]

On the subject of foci and size, I've never seen anything to say that size is a required factor in relation to the power of the focus.

Harlequin has one to two dozen pieces of flair that are various sustaining foci ranging in power from 5 to 10, and his rapier is a Force 16 weapon focus.

Frosty's dragon shaped ring is a Force 6 power focus.

Lugh Surehand wears a pinkie ring that's a Force 10 sustaining focus.

Winterhawk's cane is a Force 4 sustaining focus.

[Bull]

It's your GM's game, so ultimately, it's his call.

That said, yeah, by the rules there's no hard limits or definitions for focus size.

[KarmaInferno]

If I wanna make my focus the size of a city bus, I'll damn well do it!

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)



-k

[Wothanoz]

If I wanna make my focus the size of a city bus, I'll damn well do it!

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)



-k

Isn't their an old line in the Grimoire or something along that lines?

[sk8bcn]

Tattoo foci are embedded in the skin and can be activated/deactivated.

By extension, why would a foci that's embedded in your horns not be able to do the same?

Now, if the foci the poster is talking about is a weapon foci, that's a whole different discussion.

Rule wise, probably nothing.

Yet *I* would say that the tattoo is imprinted on your skin and you can activate/desactivate it by concentration.

Now hide your focus into your underwears and no, you'd need something more to activate/desactivate.


Which btw doesn't contradicte Frosty's case. She doesn't desactivate the foci.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Which btw doesn't contradicte Frosty's case. She doesn't desactivate the foci.

Says Who? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Modular Man]

I don't recall any rules that keep me from enchantin a piece of cyberware into a focus. In terms of balancing, that's pretty much like that net around a bone or a tattoo to me.
Size and such of a focus are purely in the eye of both the GM and the player (though GM veto trumps all, as usual).

To me, this sounds like you want a focus for your character that cannot be taken away (a notion which I can fully support, having done so in the past - power focus in a cyberarm compartment). The GM either doesn't seem to like that idea and hence put in a size requirement or has a completely different idea of foci (Gandalf-style wizards with wands versus, say, the Nightwatch books which mostly use hand-sized magic items or smaller).

I even once read about a bellybutton piercing focus for a female shaman... In my opinion, anything flies. Granted, even I would scoff at the idea of enchanted teeth fillings except for mybe a troll or orc. That is from a balancing and style perspective, though. I'd still allow it.
Just up the price a little (miniaturization and enchanting of advanced materials simply is expensive) and make sure the focus, while implanted, is still visible to astral perception. In my opinion, that's enough to keep it balanced.

It also depends on the definition of "touching" a focus to activate it. Fetishes have very strict rules regarding that, as I recall - you have to hold it in one of your hands. Foci lack such a strict definition. So in my book, anything connected to the mage's aura and/or touching the mage's body can be activated. That does include stuff inside the body, just because these are inside the aura as well.

There even is a huge danger to implanted foci - if such a focus catches an imp, it's way hard to get rid of it. It's also harder to ombat focus addiction, in my opinion, since the character has his "drug" with him any our of the day. The idea that nobody can take the focus away swings both ways.

[sk8bcn]

Says Who? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

In Harlequin's original story, it's Ehran that implement it (actually, it's only a spell) without Jane Foster noticing it.

Let's say it's a focus. It's Ehran's one and as far as I understand it and hence, it's not Jane that could activate/desactivate it.


Maybe she broke the link later on and re-attuned it. My claim is based on the original story.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

In Harlequin's original story, it's Ehran that implement it (actually, it's only a spell) without Jane Foster noticing it.

Let's say it's a focus. It's Ehran's one and as far as I understand it and hence, it's not Jane that could activate/desactivate it.


Maybe she broke the link later on and re-attuned it. My claim is based on the original story.

Methinks that you are reading too much into it. Ehran cannot pay the Karma Cost of the Focus IN JANE. He cannot Bond it to himself (This is a requirement), because he is not in possession of it. Only she can do so. And if she paid the Karma to bond it (A requirement, after all) then she can activate and deactivate it at will. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Sendaz]

Methinks that you are reading too much into it. Ehran cannot pay the Karma Cost of the Focus IN JANE. He cannot Bond it to himself (This is a requirement), because he is not in possession of it. Only she can do so. And if she paid the Karma to bond it (A requirement, after all) then she can activate and deactivate it at will. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Actually in this case Sk8bcn is correct about Ehran paying for it.

The item is originally described as a spell lock (2nd ed stuff) which is basically a souped up sustaining focus except once put in place and activated, and yes even on another body, it maintains the spell in question without any further concentration from the original mage as it creates it own astral link to sustain the magics. This was a forerunner to the Metamagic Quickening which did the same thing but without the need for a physical spell lock to anchor it.

Remember the magic being maintained doesn't need to be friendly to the target, I knew one mage who used one to keep a particular ex as a shapechanged dog for a good week or so before she relented and released him.

However, I never fully got this, since it is always astrally active and Frosty should have noticed something astrally glowing in her own leg, though it may have been further masked by Ehran so she didn't notice it.

Also the thing can act as a material link back to the maker.

If I recall, wasn't it that astral trail is how Harley found Frosty in the first place, so yeah not so great parental planning. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)


However, I originally brought it up because if you can basically bond a spell lock to someone's bone, it could serve as precedence for bonding other types of foci, although now looking back spell locks were designed to be placed anywhere where foci are a bit more restricted so maybe not.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Actually in this case Sk8bcn is correct about Ehran paying for it.

The item is originally described as a spell lock (2nd ed stuff) which is basically a souped up sustaining focus except once put in place and activated, and yes even on another body, it maintains the spell in question without any further concentration from the original mage as it creates it own astral link to sustain the magics. This was a forerunner to the Metamagic Quickening which did the same thing but without the need for a physical spell lock to anchor it.

Remember the magic being maintained doesn't need to be friendly to the target, I knew one mage who used one to keep a particular ex as a shapechanged dog for a good week or so before she relented and released him.

However, I never fully got this, since it is always astrally active and Frosty should have noticed something astrally glowing in her own leg, though it may have been further masked by Ehran so she didn't notice it.

Also the thing can act as a material link back to the maker.

If I recall, wasn't it that astral trail is how Harley found Frosty in the first place, so yeah not so great parental planning. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)


However, I originally brought it up because if you can basically bond a spell lock to someone's bone, it could serve as precedence for bonding other types of foci, although now looking back spell locks were designed to be placed anywhere where foci are a bit more restricted so maybe not.

Ahhh... My mistake then. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

As for Foci - If you can bond one to bone (Sustaining Foci) then you can bond one to Bone (Spellcasting/Power Foci). If it works for one, it should also work for another. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Cochise]

Methinks that you are reading too much into it. Ehran cannot pay the Karma Cost of the Focus IN JANE. He cannot Bond it to himself (This is a requirement), because he is not in possession of it. Only she can do so. And if she paid the Karma to bond it (A requirement, after all) then she can activate and deactivate it at will. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

I would say that you are neglecting how different magic worked in previous editions. For starters Ehran could have bonded the focus any time prior to the implantation via karma expenditure. Unlike in later Editions there was no inherent demand for a bound focus to stay within the bonded mage's direct possession after the bonding. Spell locks and their successors sustaining foci as well as anchoring foci could and in some cases had to leave the bonding mage's immediate control / possession, e.g. a sustaining focus that made a friend invisible actually had to go with said friend in order to maintain the spell instead of staying with the casting magician.

The only canon problem with said focus would have been that under standard rules Ehran would not have had the ability to activate the focus after it was implanted into Frosty, unless it involved some seriously high grade detection spell as part of an anchor focus that would react to Ehran's thoughts virtually anywhere around the globe. However, Ehran being an Immortal Elf and thus operating under NPC rule of "whatever the story requires" in addition to the "special enchantment" rules?! That certainly leaves more than enough wiggle room for such an implanted focus being bonded and controlled by Ehran, since it becomes a plot device.

The main problem - for me - with implanted foci however lies with different aspects of the presented meta physics of magic and rules:

1. In an activated state the focus would possess its own astral body (or whatever SR5 likes to call it now) and thus would create situations where one astral body resides within another in cases where the person with the implanted focus turns astrally active as well. This causes certain problems with the basic rules that astral bodies - with the exception of Earth itself - cannot pass through other astral bodies. No proper rule precedence for dealing with this situation.
2. As a magical item with an explicit astral representation an implanted focus that is active becomes a precedence for targeting something with a spell that is implanted into a physical body. Implants can however normally not be targeted individually by spell casting ... particularly not when having Essence costs.
3. No. 2 automatically leads to the question whether or not such an focus implant would/should cause Essence costs. Something that simply cannot be answered with RAW since the lack of rules on that simply cannot be taken as to infer that being allowed by default. Otherwise I could certainly make that rather stupid assertion that any metahuman can fly because the rules do not explicitly deal with metahumans not being able to fly.
4. Even when ignoring No. 1, 2 and 3 you instantly have to deal with how the enclosing aura (while not astrally active) and astral body (while astrally active but not projecting) of the person with such an implant interferes with target acquisition for spell casting purposes while the focus is active

And these are just the basic problem fields I can think of right now without further in-depth analysis.

So - regardless of rules not explicitly stating size requirements for foci - I can certainly see why a GM would want to avoid such pit traps even if rating 6 foci could be created with the size of a needle head.

[Tymeaus Jalynsfe...]

Also very valid points. Thanks Cochise. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Shemhazai]

Cochise,

To me,

1. It's occupying a cavity inside the meat body. It's not passing through.

2. It should be able to be targeted if the magician can get line of sight somehow. Maybe there's a reason why it's remained undetected.

3. No Essence loss unless it's written in a book.

4. No idea. It sounds related to 2.

Looks to me like the GM wants it to go away.

[Wothanoz]

Implanted foci should be the realm of double digit initiates. Full stop.