a guy who's lazy won't try to fix something that doesn't cause problems. a guy who's lazy and foolhardy will try and fix something he thinks is broken without making sure it is--without finding out why nobody else thinks it's broken. yeah, i'm lazy.

This community is rife with side discussions within threads. While you may have initiated this discussion it is not your thread to impose your control over. The forum and the discussions that go on in it are the community’s; I hope you can respect that.

Having said that, this from page one does not appear to be answered yet:

Here’s an example of something you could have searched for simply enough. I’ve personally posted them a number of times in the past year. However, I’ll go ahead and point them out again.

So you have how a focus resists a combat spell. Then you just have to see if it survives the damage.

See the Barrier Rating Table on p.157 to help you determine the Structure and Armor rating for the type of focus you have, perhaps that ring you have is a heavy material not unlike a chain link, or maybe that staff is an average material similar to a tree.

Also see the Damaging barriers table on p.158, note that combat spells use their base DV against barriers.

Then you decide if the damage rolled by the casting magician with their manabolt is enough to destroy the focus or not.

You’ll find that the details are not very firm, but SR isn’t about having a rule for every exact situation, it’s about having a set of rules that can be applied to many situations.

Yea, it’s called increased reflexes spell and a sustaining focus, and it’s surprisingly popular. It’s almost like an unrelated discussion from what should have been a different thread suddenly has some merit.

In my experience SR4 has adequate rules for balance. When an imbalance appears to exist my experience has shown that the rules already in the game can be applied to the problem, the trouble is finding out how to apply them. So I feel compelled to reassert the suggestion you’re choosing to ignore. While the easier solution may be to further nerf Power Foci, which have already been weakened in SR4 compared to previous editions, you may find through careful consideration and study that a solution already exists. Perhaps if you have elucidated further clarifications and information from those who came to this thread to assist you with your perceived imbalance you would have discovered them. Instead you choose to insult and possibly drive away the help that was offered. Perhaps you were not seeking assistance however.

As to the topic at hand:

I’ve found that an over reliance on foci, regardless of type, and while it usually ends up being sustaining foci that are abuse the same principals apply. If you are indeed using that power foci for everything then you’ve got it active a lot of the time, and if that’s the case it’s prone to destruction.

A power focus is twice the Karma cost to bond compared to a Spellcasting or Summoning focus. How many times to you have to lose that before you realize that perhaps having all your eggs in one basket is a risk. That Binding focus is useful because it will almost never be destroyed because you’re not very likely to ever have it active while a threat is nearby. You can lose/have destroyed your power focus, but still have that extra assistance in binding.

After looking this thread over I’m not sure you’ve given a variety of the drawbacks presented the opportunity of real consideration. And as you’ve systematically disregarded each one individually, I recommend you reread this thread and compile a comprehensive list of what you’ve had presented here and consider them in total.

I also urge you not to overlook the relative usefulness compared to other aspects of the game. While it is easiest to explore the issue as a simple Gedanken Experiment alone in a vacuum, it is really a complex thing that exists in the midst of a complex environment, with a wide variety of rules to compare with.

OK, so the attacker typically rolls Spellcasting + Magic + any relevant bonuses/penalties vs. the Focus's Force + Counterspelling (I assume that the owner would protect his Foci), right?

Let's go with a ring for the example. Armor 6 and Structure 7. I'm not sure how armor is going to work against a mana spell - if I'm reading it correctly, this will only come up against physical spells.

OK, 1:1 keeps it simple enough here.

Can a mana spell actually destroy a physical object? I'd assume that the best that it could do would be to deactivate the Focus, or if you want something more drastic, it could deattune the Focus, requiring the magician to rebond with it. Either way, the mana spell can't affect the physical object, so once it's deactivated/deattuned it's invulnerable to mana spells.

Everything in this seems pretty clear except the actual outcome. I can not accept that the Focus will be destroyed by a mana spell, but whether it is merely deactivated or fully deattuned is an important distinction.

In general no, but a focus in not a mere physical object.

I think it’s easier to assume that the non-living, non-magic pertains equally to the shorter non-living statement that appears in the parenthesis, than to assume that they broadened the focus of the statement within the sentence. I would say they were working to save words in a document that they had to make serious cuts from a number of locations, not just magic.

Precedence is that the astral form is linked to the physical form, and damage to one is equivalent to damage to the other. If a projecting mage is hit with a manabolt then the physical damage is also reflected in his physical form.

It may be less difficult to accept that a mana spell can destroy a Focus when you consider that it does have an astral form that can be separated from its physical form.

Perhaps if you prefer to avoid the actual physical destruction of the physical form then consider that if project with an active focus its astral form travels with you and its physical form is unrelated. Then the focus itself is entirely that astral form, and the only time that you can use a focus is when that astral form is active, as it exists whenever the focus is activated. Given that then destroying the astral form is sufficient to destroy the focus nature of the object. Successful destruction of the focus in that case would leave only a mundane object, with it’s magic destroyed.

In either case the value of the object goes from 25k per force and 8x Force in Karma to close enough to zero to be zero. At best you’ve got the price of a nice ring, at worst you’ve got scrap metal…

Good point.

Convincing argument. A harsh ruling, but this explanation is convincing.

You can astrally track down your focus if it is stolen however. At least in old editions bound foci could be used to track down owners and vice versa.

Ahhhhh... that's what GM's like me call "bait."

This is where I'm at with the problem right now too. I'm taking the route of making them spend Karma to bond, but that's really only a possiblity if the GM starts characters with some Karma (which I do). Other wise, a new BP cost for bonding really should be calculated.

ANd if you are using the power foci for 'everythign you do' this would be exactly the case.


If every time you do magic (save coutnerspelling) you are taking a pull from the power foci stick, you are going to become addict to that foci.

If it is just every time you summon a spirit of man, or cast a heal spell perhaps not as bad (unless you are a medic, then maybe).


Power foci can help with almost everything.... which means you are likely to use them for almost everything, which means you will be an addict

peace

How is having those characters that choose not to bond a Focus spend their Karma in other ways a bad thing?

The addiction rules are relatively easy on characters as written. Addiction tests are not supposed to made frequently even if the cause of the addiction is indulged often. As an infrequent test, Edge can help to prevent Focus Addiction (or to keep it from getting worse) in many cases.

Thresholds of 3 or 4 (you'd used 3 earlier for power foci) are pretty hard to make reliably. If you are worried about people avoiding this with Edge, just disallow Edge use on Addiction tests. Hmm...your luck doesn't seem to help you overindulge without penalty...

I'd used 3 becasue that appears to be the upper limit of all examples given. Threshold 4 seems to go outside the addiction system as written.

As for Edge, I'd never disallow the spending of Edge for any roll. Of course, there's always something else that will come up later that you'll wish you had Edge left to spend on, so it all works out.

Exactly why I'd consider disallowing Edge for addiction. If you can spend it then a Lucky Human Juicer suddenly becomes VERY good (unless the GM just says you have addictions regardless of rolls).

Why should Edge be disallowed? Why shouldn't a lucky human juicer be very good?

Bullshit. Luck can be a lot of things, but in SR it can measure all the intangibles that are outside of your other traits. Edge on an addiction roll might just be because something you ate/inhaled/whatever triggers or blocks the same receptors reducing some of the effect of the drug, or possibly your system deals better than others, or possibly the dose you got was well-prepared (or poorly-prepared depending on how you look at it). Edge certainly can help here without even going tint o the logic defying levels that hand-of-god relies upon.

BTW, properly dosed and administered, most drugs have some beneficial uses. The 'just say no' party line has many people thinking that cocaine and steroids are deadly poison, but both are used in medicine. Why should drugs be outside of the gray area that runners operate in if hacking off limbs and gouging out eyes to replace them with machinery is OK?

Makes me think that cyberware and bioware might become addictive too...

Although I don't think I'd ever go quite that far, it isn't really that bad of an idea theme-wise, but I think I'd also try to figure out some way to also fit in the rush that a Mage must feel from breaking the laws of physics using nothing but his/her own natural Mojo, even before thinking about any Foci.

The only piece of cyberware that I would consider available for addiction would be the adrenal pump.

Damned adrenaline junkies...

Think about Muscle Replacement and Muscle Toner/Augmentation. They are a quick-fix to being massive and studly. Get a level, everyone's doing it. Soon, you'll want an upgrade. Maybe another. You can't stop now, just a bit more and you'll be world-class.

Easily as addictive as cosmetic surgery - look at the people psychologically addicted to face lifts and other anti-aging treatments.

Likewise, consider the technophile that just has to keep adding that newest feature (and upgrading old features). Before long the character is 'more machine than man'...

There really is no reason why the 'power' of personal enhancements couldn't be as addictive as Foci are to magicians.

This has always been an intended meme in CP, though, hasn't it? The problem I see is that it's rarely made a part of the game, either due to lack of familiarity with the genre, or lack of rules to force the issue.

I could get heavily into theories on psychological addiction, but the general idea is that Focus Addiction is a spiritual addiction, and functions like a physical one. That makes them totally different animals. Losing a focus you're addicted to makes you worse than you were before; losing a piece of cyberware just leaves you as you were before.

That said, I used to have an NPC augmentation addict with the stated goal of becoming a cyberzombie. You can theoretically become psychologically addicted to anything, but it's much more rare than you might realize. According to my research, plastic surgery addiction is closely related to Body Dimorphic Disorder, which affects about 1% of Americans. (Worldwide data is not availiable.) That's hardly a major number.

The key being properly dosed and administered. The average pusher isn't concerned about what you are doing with the drugs--he'll just keep selling them to you.

I'm no anti-drug fanatic. I've sampled a lot of them and hung out with people who used them habitually. Personal experience to me dictates that there is no luck involved--if you use the drug constantly you will get addicted. Some people sooner than others, granted, but I think that has more to do with biochemistry than luck.

Also remember that there are a lot of different levels of addiction in this game. Just because you fail your Edge-less roll doesn't mean you are going to end up dead in a dumpster with a needle sticking out of your arm. Mild addiction isn't too horrible and you still have at least 3 more levels to go before you are a burnout.

I disagree. If I lose a Focus I go back to working magic like I did before. If I lose cyber/bio - assuming we're not talking about a replacement limb/organ/whatever - I go back to living like I did before.

This was the way it worked prior to Street Magic introducing Focus Addiction. There is no reason that Augmentation can't/won't introduce something similar for 'ware.

So what's the chance of something that affects 1% of the population to turn up in a group of runners? About 100% if your group contains a mage. Having someone that goes cyber-psycho isn't any more or less odd.

There is a world of difference between street drugs from a pusher and the performance enhancers that runners will use (including stims). Shadowrunners are going to take calculated risks and performance enhancing substances are morally no worse than cyber/bio/magic enhancements. You can bet that 'professional' runners will check with their street doc for dosage and administration instructions - just like they do when the need help with installing or repairing cyber/bio. These are calculated risks. Edge seems like it would work just fine.

Just to play devil's advocate for a moment though... anyone can get that smartlink bonus for less than 1bp worth of gear.

Which I think is the point: Anyone could get the smartlink bonus and the magician has to buy Magician and buy and bind the Power Focus but noone complains about how broken the smartlink is.