 sustain focus, can it sustain any spell?, need some book ninja fu |
  |
 Mar 13 2005, 03:58 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
Target  Group: Members Posts: 36 Joined: 7-March 05 From: Detroit,MI Member No.: 7,142  |
Ok scope this. I was GMing as usual and one of my players picked up a sustain focus. he knows levitate so he locks it in at a force four with a target of himself. so does that me he always levities as long as he holds it?.
and a few more things about levitate? this one happened a few sessions ago, but another player of mine lavitaed a smug out the hands of some street garbage ganger. then proceeded to aim and cast another levitate on the trigger of the gun blasting it off in auto fire at the poor frager that got it stolen from him. don't worry about time this was over the course of three turns. so the question is can levitate man a target, or can two levitate spells be cast on the same target. as always pardon my spelling/grammar. im still a idiot |
 |
 
|
|
Mar 13 2005, 04:13 PM
Post
#2
|
|||||
|
Decker on the Threshold Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,922 Joined: 14-March 04 Member No.: 6,156 |
Basically. Remember that sustaining foci are bought by the spell, so a Levitate sustaining focus can't be used for any other spell. Also remember the focus is active, meaning it's glowing on the astral plane, conflicts with astral barriers/wards, can be destroyed in astral combat, etc. Sustaining stuff like levitate is powerful, but there are important drawbacks to keep in mind as well.
Hm. Well, I suppose it's not *technically* illegal to do this, but if I ever saw anyone try it the TN mods would rack up like crazy. +4 for Called Shot, +6 Very Small Object, +2 for partial cover (the rest of the gun), +2 for the other Levitate spell you're sustaining (can't use the focus here as you'd need to place the focus on the gun itself while casting), for a minimum TN of 18 for the spell itself. If he gets the spell off, then there's the problem of aiming the gun: +4 for sustaining *two* Levitate spells, +2 for using the gun from far away, and uses the Gunnery skill. Your mage *does* have the Gunnery skill, right? :D You're better off getting Magic Fingers. :P |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 13 2005, 04:18 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Running, running, running Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,220 Joined: 18-October 04 From: North Carolina Member No.: 6,769 |
heh, this is actually very similar to a question i had, my character, being realtively low bod, low armor, tends to die, alot. so i wanted to get a focus (prolly around 4) and sustain stabalize on it, he(the mud man) said it wont work, because its a permanent spell, and isnt sustainable. do you guys agree?
|
|
|
|
 Mar 13 2005, 04:33 PM
Post
#4
|
|||||
|
Target Group: Members Posts: 36 Joined: 7-March 05 From: Detroit,MI Member No.: 7,142 |
Thats what I did, but he used all of his spell pool and bought a few dice with karma and pulled it off with two successes. thanks for the help.
I agree. I was thinking for a split second you could use the focus to sustain the spell till it becomes a perm...but why spend the karma...and if you unconscious how can you bind and lock the spell. so I would say no you can't lock stabilize into a sustain focus. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 13 2005, 04:45 PM
Post
#5
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 130 Joined: 25-February 05 Member No.: 7,119 |
Nope, a sustaining focus doesn't work that way. If you want to work an effect like that you'd need to learn anchoring metamagic. Anchoring is a major pain in the rear in third edition, but it would let you rig a stabilize spell to go off and be sustained when the right condition occurs. (i.e. you reaching deadly wounds) |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 13 2005, 05:43 PM
Post
#6
|
|||||||
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,944 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
Uhm, no. Sustaining foci are only bought at a specific force. The spell they can sustain is named when the focus is bonded. So a focus could be re-bonded, karma paid, and be able to sustain a different spell.
Exactly. He will levitate in place. He has no control over how or where he moves. He can make a strength or willpower test to see if he can overcome the spell. The reason - magic is mindless. The focus is sustaining and controlling the spell. It can't issue commands or think where it wants the spell to take the levitated item.
Levitate smg away? No problem, but check for strength or willpower test. Levitate trigger? No, I would not allow it. Let them get magic fingers if they want to effect parts of an item. Fire it on the poor fragger? Maybe, if I were to allow the trigger thing. But totally ineffective. Would need to use Use SMG spell to use the item. Or could argue that it is suppressing fire. Still no, because it has no skill to roll to hit anything. Make a lot of noise and ricochet's and scare the heck out of everyone? Ok. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Mar 13 2005, 06:06 PM
Post
#7
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 351 Joined: 17-February 05 Member No.: 7,093 |
I have to disagree with this. Sure magic is mindless (unless it happens to be a spirit), but a sustaining focus does not take the control away from the caster. All a sustaining focus does is allow the spell to be sustained without the caster concentrating on it. If the caster lost control of the spell in a sustaining focus then he'd never be able to turn it off, like a quickened spell. If the caster throws the levitate spell on himself through a sustaining focus, then he can zip around all he wants, and he doesn't even have to concentrate on it. As for levitating and firing the gun... Yeah, you're way better off with a magic fingers spell. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 13 2005, 06:14 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Neophyte Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,073 Joined: 23-August 04 Member No.: 6,587 |
I would say you cant fire the gun with any accuracy using the levitate spell, that is what the magic fingers spell is fore. I would allow the pulling of the trigger but the best you could hope for is unusually inaccurate suppressive fire
Edward |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13 2005, 06:34 PM
Post
#9
|
|||
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,944 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
So you would allow a magician to cast a high force Trid Phantasm spell at his leasure and let a sustaining focus sustain it? Then the magician overcomes huge drain, sleeping in his nice cozy bed. Any time the magician decides to use the Trid Phantasm spell being sustained, he just needs to command it to project whatever illusion he wants, perhaps even commanding it where and how to move, all with no effort (as in even taking a free action) on the magicians part. To "drop" the illusion, he just commands it to have the illusion there is lint in his navel or something else innocuous. I don't allow magic to work so wonderfully. If the mage wants to change the sustained action the focus was performing, the mage needs to take over the sustaining. The spell isn't broken, but the magician has to use actions and had the sustaining penalty if he does anything else at the same time. When the magician gives the duty of sustaining back to the focus, the focus will continue sustaining the spell in the same way it was given to it. In the levitate example: Mage casts levitate, uses it to travel horizontally x meters a turn. When he passes the sustaining to the focus, it keeps travelling in that direction at that speed until it is opposed or the magician takes over sustaining the spell. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 13 2005, 06:58 PM
Post
#10
|
|||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 351 Joined: 17-February 05 Member No.: 7,093 |
Hmm, Tisoz, that would run counter to canon, so if you want to houserule that, that's your business, but it's not the way sustaining foci work as described in SR3. Pg 197, SR3:
That means that a caster can change direction and speed of the subject (in this case himself) at will. Pg 191, SR3
To paraphrase: If you turn off a sustaining focus (by 'taking over the spell', which I might add, may or may not be possible, it isn't mentioned) you have to re-caste the spell it had been sustaining. You cannot 'pass' a spell to a sustaining focus, you have to cast it into the focus. Sure a mage can keep a sustained trid phantasm around, but it'd be on him, and I'm not sure if he could go to sleep without automatically shutting down all his sustained spells. Your examples are a houserule effect, not canon. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 13 2005, 07:02 PM
Post
#11
|
|||
|
Traumatizing players since 1992 Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,282 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Las Vegas, NV Member No.: 220 |
I agree with Tisoz on the spell lock issue.
That's false logic. The caster never "turns off" the spell in a spell lock directly anyway, he deactivates the spell lock at which point the spell stops sustaining. Nothing really says he has any control over the spell once it's in the lock, it's autonomous really.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 13 2005, 07:00 PM
Post
#12
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 351 Joined: 17-February 05 Member No.: 7,093 |
then it's down to a rules-interpretation issue.
I would assume that any spell cast into a sustaining focus would still be under the control of the caster, within the limits of the spell itself. An Armor spell, for instance has two modes: off and on, and you can do jack about it inbetween. A levitate spell, on the other hand, allows you to vary speed and direction at the caster's discretion. I would assume the sustained spell would allow the caster the same options as always without having to end the spell to change things. I.E. the caster uses a sustaining focus to levitate himself and he's effectively flying and/or floating wherever he wants, without having to re-cast the spell every time he wants to change direction or speed. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13 2005, 07:09 PM
Post
#13
|
|||||||||
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,944 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
Yes, I agree. But when he passes the sustaining of the spell to the focus, he also passes on the ability to change what the spell is doing. The focus and the spell are mindless, they just keep following the last order.
The focus is not being turned off by taking over the spell, which I may add must be possible if it can be handed back and forth to elementals, the spell has not ended so has no need to be cast again. If you take the casting into the focus literally, then only the focus could be levitated. A spell, once cast into the focus could not be controlled at all after being cast. |
||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Mar 13 2005, 07:18 PM
Post
#14
|
|||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 351 Joined: 17-February 05 Member No.: 7,093 |
As stated earlier, I disagree, but as far as I can tell it's a rule-interpretation issue, and therefore out of the bounds of surety.
The book mentions nothing about sustaining foci acting like the elemental's sustain service. In fact I'd say they work on completely different principles, since the sustaining foci doesn't degrade the longer it holds the spell for the caster. Pretty much once the spell leaves the sustaining focus, it deactivates, requiring a re-cast to activate again, since the spell can't be passed back and forth like a bad cold.
No, actually that's covered in the rules. The spell is cast through the focus onto the subject, which is why when the focus loses contact with the subject it deactivates. You could sustain a levitate spell through a focus on the focus itself, I suppose, but why? |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
Mar 13 2005, 07:38 PM
Post
#15
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,006 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
If this were true I'd say it'd be logical to assume that the sustaining focus would continue to operate when out of the hands of the mage, as it is now in control of the spell. Needless to say, I don't think it's true. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
Mar 13 2005, 09:00 PM
Post
#16
|
|
|
Karma Police Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 1,358 Joined: 22-July 04 From: Gothenburg, SE Member No.: 6,505 |
Is it impossible to use sustaining foci the way spell locks are uses in House of the Sun? Were the orc body guard/driver/killer has a pin with an armor spell on it, cast by a mage whoīs at a different location no were in sight? In case that is still possible, I would say the spell is independent of itīs caster to some degree. Of course that doesnīt rule out that the caster could control it if he wanted to.
Back in the days of spell locks that used to be one of their prime uses: The mage hands out invisibility spell locks to all of the team mates. Making them invisible even when out of sight of the mage himself. If they need to deactivate the spell they just remove it from their person for a moment. I allowed it resently even, I believe. May be non canon... So if a mage hands a levitate focus to another person. What would then happen? I think "he just floats mindlessly" is the boring answer. Iīd give power of the spell to the caster (duh). And if the caster walked away. Then the mindless floating begins (at least if the ground is far below). You donīt have to remind me that no sensible magican would abuse foci these ways. Itīs to dangerous and expensive to loose them. But itīs fun to speculate. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13 2005, 09:22 PM
Post
#17
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 351 Joined: 17-February 05 Member No.: 7,093 |
Erm... the Mage has to be within LOS to cast the spell at the very least. Once the spell's active and sustained, it can move outside of the caster's LOS without fear of disappearing. The mage can STILL hand out sustaining foci and cast a bunch of invisibility spells through them to have the entire team invisible (hmm... focus addiction?). The way levitate is described, if the caster just set a guy to moving and then left, I'm thinking that's when they would just stop and stick wherever they were when the caster left LOS. Once the sustaining focus is removed from the subject, the spell ends and has to be re-cast to work again, so you can't have an invisible guy drop the focus on the ground to go visible for a moment then pick it up again to go invisible, the spell ends once the focus is dropped.
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 13 2005, 09:31 PM
Post
#18
|
|||||||||||
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,944 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
Thus an Armor spell is a good candidate to use in a sustaining focus.
That's where our opinion differs. I don't think a levitate spell is a good choice to have in a sustaining focus because I don't hold your assumptions. The spell doesn't need to end, the magician just needs to exert his control over the spell. I think sustaining signifies control. I understand what your point. I just do not agree.
You asked for an example of sustaining being passed around.
The spell is not cast into the focus, I wrongly assumed you actually read that. It is not cast through the focus either. The focus needs to be in contact with the target to sustain it, breaking the contact, breaks the sustainment. All of which is pretty irrelevant.
Please note the without attention part. It is the basis for my interpretation. |
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Mar 13 2005, 10:02 PM
Post
#19
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 351 Joined: 17-February 05 Member No.: 7,093 |
'Maintaining' is the word I'm looking at, in conjunction with 'without attention or concentration'. So the spell is maintained, that is, kept active, but not controlled by the sustaining focus. The caster retains full control of the spell. And the spell does actually need to be cast through a sustaining focus, which is why it's an exclusive action to do it. You can't just cast a spell, sustain it yourself, and then link it into a sustaining focus at your leisure, you need to be using the focus from the very start.
In the end, this appears to be an interpretation problem. I'll hold to what I see the rules as saying, because that's what makes sense to me, is supported by canon, and makes for better play. You'll hold to your interpretation for your own reasons, but without direct canon references to why these things can or cannot happen, I don't think either of us has much ground to argue from. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 13 2005, 10:13 PM
Post
#20
|
|||||
|
Mr. Johnson Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 2,587 Joined: 25-January 05 From: Berkeley, CA Member No.: 7,014 |
This is definitely "okay", although I'd allow the ganger a simple Quickness check to "keep" the SMG (probably a TN of 4). Levitate doesn't let you manipulate objects too finely or with any amount of strength, at least not like Magic Fingers (the spell you SHOULD be using for this purpose).
Not a valid use of levitate. For one thing, spells cannot target parts of objects, only objects as a whole (unless dealing with very large objects). You'd need Magic Fingers to do this.
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Mar 13 2005, 11:18 PM
Post
#21
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 177 Joined: 23-February 03 Member No.: 4,141 |
This is an interesting thread. I haven't weighed in for awhile. I think there needs to be a rules clarification here. Add something like this to the rule and it works fine;
Sustaining Foci A sustaining focus is used to "lock" a sustained spell THAT NORMALLY DOES NOT REQUIRE CONCENTRATION TO CHANGE IT'S PARAMETERS, maintaining it without attention or concentration on the part of the caster. So only if the spell can be cast without changing anything would the spell be able to be quickened. This would rule out Levitation as the caster would have to focus on the spell to change direction, speed, and elevations. It would also rule out Trid Entertainment and other spells as well. Actually I wanted to add that it would not eliminate the possibility of using Levitate. As someone correctly mentioned earlier once the parameters of the spell were set and sustained the user would lose control of the spell. So for example if the spell was set to levitate at 1 meter/ turn straight upwards. The recipient of the spell lock would simply float away like a balloon. |
|
|
|
|
Mar 14 2005, 01:26 AM
Post
#22
|
|||||||||||
|
Free Spirit Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 3,944 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Bloomington, IN UCAS Member No.: 1,920 |
I keep giving canon references, but you fail to accept them.
When a magician casts a spell that is maintained by a sustaining focus, the caster never sustains it themself, the focus does. The focus precludes the need for a caster to concentrate on the spell. Since magic and the focus are mindless, there is no way to control spells maintained by sustaining foci. It would follow that is foolish to cast spells needing instructions into a sustaining focus if you expect instructions to be followed. Your idea of the caster maintaining direction of the spell when all the work is being done by the focus is what lacks canon backing. By your interpretation, spells maintained by a sustaining focus should end when the caster is unconscious or asleep.
The reason they don't, is the focus is doing it in place of the caster. The caster is never directing the spell's effects. In light of re-reading all the rules, I don't think I would allow the caster to override the focus to direct the spell at all. The spell is never controlled by the caster; it is controlled by the focus. The sustaining focus can not direct the spell; it is mindless. The spell cannot direct itself; it is mindless. |
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Mar 14 2005, 01:39 AM
Post
#23
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 942 Joined: 13-May 04 Member No.: 6,323 |
I'd say that a sustaining focus just sustains the spell. That's all it does. It doesn't usurp controll of the spell from the caster... that would be called a "sustaining and controll usurping focus" or some such. It just means the caster doesn't have to concentrate on the spell... but he still has controll.
JaronK |
|
|
|
|
Mar 14 2005, 01:57 AM
Post
#24
|
|
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 556 Joined: 28-May 04 From: Moorhead, MN, USA Member No.: 6,367 |
Yeah, that's the way we've always played. I understand your point tisoz. I'd gladly adapt to it if a GM (or even a majority of players) said that's the way it is, but it never has been.
I'd like to see what the authors had in mind, but I'm afraid to mention it to the FAQ. :D |
|
|
|
|
Mar 14 2005, 01:56 AM
Post
#25
|
|||||||||||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 668 Joined: 15-February 05 From: Ontario, Canada Member No.: 7,086 |
The canon references specify that the focus maintains the spell. It doesn't say the focus controls the spell. In fact, it says, nothing about the controlling of the spell. That puts it in the grey area of GM call. Mine, were I to make one, would be that the caster maintains control, the focus simply maintains it. So if you wanted to use levitate into it you could, and control it however you wanted. When you weren't directing it, it would just continue what it was doing beforehand. If that was 'hover' then it's hover. If it was 'move forward', it continues to move forward. For the sadistic GMs, yes, that would mean zap the mage until he's unconscious while the focus is going 'up', and the mage will rise out of the atmosphere eventually ;) |
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 25th April 2024 - 10:21 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.