New Metamagic, Making Anchoring worthwhile Options

[Jason Farlander]

Long, long ago in a land far, far away, I posted a thread concerning a system of tiered metamagic abilities. At the time, and, in fact, until rather recently, I was somewhat disappointed by my inability to come up with any techniques branching off of anchoring that would be both useful (to shadowrunners and nonshadowrunners alike) and also fit more with the flavor and intent of the base technique - making magic available (in a limited way) to mundanes.

Random thoughts about flying cars ended up in the generation of these two enhancements of anchoring, which, IMHO, make the anchoring technique actually worthwhile. I still havent thought of names for them, but perhaps someone out there can help me.

?
Prerequisite: Anchoring

This technique enhances the durability and overall usefulness of reusable anchoring foci produced by the initiate. Specifically, the initiate can produce reusable anchoring foci that no longer require a new linking test prior to reactivation. The initiate must still resist drain from the spell each time the focus is reactivated.

?
Prerequisite: Anchoring

One of the limitations of "normal" anchoring foci is that the owner of the foci has no direct control over the effect aside from simple activation and deactivation. While for many spells (such as armor, invisibility, heal, and so on) this limitation is more or less irrelevant, other anchored spells (such as entertainment, levitate, control thoughts, etc) are rendered nearly useless. This technique (partially) overcomes that limitation, finally granting mundanes a sense of the power available to the awakened.

The initiate with this technique can impart control over sustained spells to the owners of anchoring foci he or she produces. This applies to both expendable and reusable foci. Thus, the details of an anchored phantasm spell could be determined by the focus' owner, and the owner of an anchoring focus with a linked levitate could control the direction and speed of movement (up to a maximum determined by the original linking). Controlling an activated anchored spell requires some concentration, though not as much as sustaining a spell - the owner suffers a +1 TN penalty while actively controlling the effects of an anchored spell (this penalty is negated by the Focused Concentration edge). This technique does not in any way grant enhanced targeting abilities or any enhanced control over spells of instant duration to the owner.

Thoughts? Opinions? More-or-less constructive criticisms?

(Note: I like making new metamagic techniques)

[Ancient History]

<raised-eyebrow> If I understand #1(?) correctly, you're essentially trying to bring back spell locks.

[Jason Farlander]

Well... a much more expensive and limited version, which is only producable by an initiate of at least grade 2. But kinda.

[Kanada Ten]

I always thought allowing multiple links for the same spells would be better than current Anchoring and not as bad as Spell Locks. Something like the number of links equal to Grade. The ability of enemies to steal the Anchor focus and turn it on and off quickly until the mage goes bye-bye is a serious limitation of Anchoring.

[tisoz]

I was hoping for an Anchoring fix. IMO, when they rewrote 3rd ed, someone with clout must have hated anchoring. They castrated it.

1) I don't see how this is unbalanced, it really seems kind of weak. Ancient, the big thing with spell locks was not having to resisit drain every time. This doesn't remove that condition.

Name - Triggering.(?)

2) I thought the person gained control by bonding it?

[Jason Farlander]

Mundanes can not bond foci, so a mundane can not ever gain control of the spell linked to an anchoring focus. In retrospect, I think that the term "owner" as used in MITS refers to the mage who has bonded the focus, and thats not the meaning of the term I indended.

I'll use a couple of examples to illustrate the intent of technique #2

1) Lets say Richy McRicherson (a mundane) wants to impress his friends with his *own* entertainment spell. He could, of course, cost more than simply hiring a mage to do it... but doing something yourself is way cooler than hiring someone else to do it. Unfortunately this is impossible - as a mundane, he can not bond a focus, so the effects of an anchored entertainment spell could never be controlled by him. The new technique, however, grants exactly what normal anchoring foci do not - actual control of the focus to unbonded possessors. So Richy could go into a specialized store, submit to a background check to determine whether handing him a ritual link to the bonded mage presents an unacceptable risk, and if he passes, he could have the satisfaction of actually controlling his very own magic effect... kinda.

2) Practically everyone wishes they could fly (unless a phobia of some kind interferes), but having a mage cast levitate on you just isnt fulfilling - the casting mage gets to control the whole thing, not you. A focus creating this technique, however, *does* grant control of the spell to the possessor - as a mundane, you could actually fly around wherever you wanted with no restrictions. There are a lot of people who would pay top dollar for that. Specialized versions (containing "detect vehicle") might allow people to fly their cars around. Again, such people would have to submit to background checks and so on to qualify.

So...., having made those examples, another thought occurs to me. Would it be a better or worse idea to change technique #2 such that it simply allows mundanes to bond the special anchoring foci produced with it (non-runners could simply use the karma-for-cash rules)?

[Herald of Verjig...]

For #2, make the ritual process more annoying (additional TN mod equal to 10-essense of the intended owners) and require integrating a ritual sample of the intended mundane into the focus. Maybe even mandate that the potential owner be present for the entire length of the enchanting process. They won't have to actuallly do anything, but may make bad choices that distract the enchanter so that the process takes even longer.

The point of the above is to suport rarity and to leave some doubt as to whether it fits Dunkie's request. Maybe allow the originator of this to get partial payment because a mundane can use such a focus, but not just any mundane can pick one up and use it.

[tisoz]

Might integrate a 'mindlink' type spell into it so the mundane telepathically expresses his wishes to the magician and he controls the spell to carry out the wish.

Or

With the levitation spell integrate triggers to indicate direction and the focus responds. Up, down, left, right, forward, no the other forward.

[Cochise]

*start's thinking* ...

No, I guess I won't present that interpretation on the current wording that allows the use of spell anchors for sustained spells without causing drain each and every time and reduces the need for re-linking ... :D

[Aesir]

If a mage wants to make his samurai buddy invisible and uses a sustaining focus, wouldn´t this magical effect essentially be in the control of the mundane sammy, since it´s in effect until he removes the sustaining focus? So there already is a canon way of doing this. Only the target wouldn´t have control of for example a levitation spell themselves. Maybe this calls for a new spell. Fly. the target gains the ablility to fly as long as the caster sustains the spell. But the new metamagics sugested here aren´t a bad idea either.

>edit< On second thought I think I´d rule for new spells to be developed if a player wanted to give up control over a spell to a target. That way i could watch over every specific spell individually so there wheren´t any game breakers created >edit<