Hey guys, quick thing.
Sustaining Foci...
1. How many spells can you sustain at once with one? Is it just one? Would you need 3 separate foci to sustain invisibility, armor and increased reflexes?
2. Can you "break" a focus by overcasting through either a sustaining or casting focus?

On spell per focus.



Not normally (on a glitch you might, but that is at the GM discretions). Note the highest force spell you can use in a sustaining focus is the rating of the focus. A casting focus is different (spell category or power focus), and just adds dice to your rolls and is not impacted by the force of the spell cast.

1. yes, just one
2. no. foci don't care whether overcasting or not.

You need separate or 'stacked', yes.

You can't break it.

Off the top of my head:

1. I think each focus can only sustain one spell. It's how I've always played them, but this may be a holdover from previous editions.
2. Don't think you can break a focus by overcasting. Also, not worth it for sustaining foci as they can only sustain a spell with a force less than or equal to their rating.

So on #2, there wouldn't be any problem overcasting Armor through a sustaining focus with or without edge?
I'm not sure if I'm worried about breaking the focus so much as generating more hits than the focus force.
Is the force of a spell hard-capped by the force of the sustaining focus?

If I overcast an armor spell at force 10 through a force 5 sustaining focus...how many hits count?
Let's say I get 9 hits. Without a focus, that's 9 hits. If I roll 9 hits through a focus...do only 5 count?

You cannot put a force 10 spell in a rating 5 focus. If you used edge in casting for a force 5 focus to get more hits than normally allowed, the spell is still at force 5 and would work. Not that the number of hits you get is independent of the force of the spell for the purposes of sustaining foci, just that normally the force of the spell limits the number of hits you can get.

So yes: there's no problem 'overfilling' a focus, because you can't do it.

Unless Edge gets involved.

Technically Edge hits can go over the focus limits, the way the text is worded.

But many GMs don't allow that.




-k

Yes, but as people said: that's hits, not force. The force can't go over.

So...if I used edge and got like 8 successes through a force 5 focus...how many hits count?
I think I only mentioned overcasting because it is one of two ways to lift or increase the force cap.

The GM has to decide. Some (many?) people think that Edge lets you 'store' and sustain as many hits as you like. (Some think that only hits from the Edge dice count? I dunno.)

By RAW all 8 hits counts. Though as pointed out, some GM's could house rule it otherwise.

Even ignoring the "1 spell per focus" rule, you still couldn't maintain all three of those spells with one focus.
One is an illusion spell, one is a manipulation spell, and the third is health.

Sustaining foci are not "any spell" they're bound to a specific type (Health, Illusion, Manipulation, and so on).

I totally forgot about that Draco18s.

Well, either most are or it's another typo to add to the mess as Lugh Surehand is listed as having two Force 10 Sustaning Foci (Street Legends, page 39; his pinky rings). No type of magic is indicated, unlike his combat and manipulation counterspelling foci.

If it's not a typo, then every magician that knows this are going to want to know how they were made.

Yep. That is something a lot seem to miss (like the writers of Street Legends, apparantly).

Bye
Thanee

Well, they could be some ancient semi-unique artifacts.

I think it's likelier to be an incomplete description - from what I hear, the entries don't always nail down all of the details.

On Edge used for casting a spell onto a sustaining focus - keep in mind that it uncaps hits (assuming a GM allows it; it is RAW, but so is empathy software, and a lot of GMs nix that, too), but does not affect things dependent purely on the Force of the spell. In other words, Edge might let you meet the threshold of 4 to get the maximum initiative bonus even though you are using a rating: 2 sustaining focus for the increase reflexes spell. But you couldn't use that spell to sustain an increase [Body] spell if your Body was higher than 2, because the Force of the spell has to be equal or higher than the Attribute you are increasing.

Blech Double post

forgive me .... but this is the 1st Ive heard of this ... I know it is the case for spellcasting foci but never heard of it for sustaining Foci

Source quote please ? *opens his own book to shuffle through*

Edit .... wow ... ya I did miss this ... well learn something new every day

hmmmm after closer inspection I see how this can be misinterpreted ... yet another instance of bad editing ..... Catagory is mentioned in the "Spell foci" Header ... and in the 1st 2 examples (Spellcasting / counterspelling) but not in sustaining ... horay for another RAW vs. RAI point ....

you've mentioned that street legends it was "Overlooked" ? I have to wonder about that now

I am now searching for other "flubs" to see if they are in any other printed stuff"

ok ... after a brief Search through a couple of print mods I have found some examples

Dawn of the artifacts 2
Dawn of the artifacts 4

Both have several examples of Sustaining foci not being catagory specific

can anyone else find some examples in print where they are catagory specific ?

Seems pretty clear that sustaining foci are tied to a category, using SR4A, p199

Spell Foci
Spell foci empower a magician’s Sorcery skills. There are three types of spell foci: Spellcasting foci, Counterspelling foci, and Sustaining foci. Each spell focus must be attuned to a specific category of spells (Combat, Detection, Health, etc.) when it is created, and this cannot be changed.

I see what you mean about the "category appropriate to the focus" text examples, but I think an omission of that same text from the sustaining focus example doesn't mean anything. The rule has already been given on the very same page, so not repeating the rule in that particular example is not particularly interesting.

dont get me wrong ... Im not arguing the text .... however I AM Finding lack of support in Printed SR4 Mods .... Im abpout to go through all the missions and everything else Searching for something to support the catagory argument

Im searching based on the fact that this is a fairly drastic change from previous editions (not that I havent seen anything like it before)

You got a source for this? I'm certain you are correct, but I am unable to locate the rules.

SR4A p. 182.

Note, that only Edge dice get a free pass past the spell's Force.

If you use Edge to reroll your non-hits, for example, the whole test will still be limited by the spell's Force, because you do not use any Edge dice.

If you add Edge to your dice pool before or after the test, you have to roll them seperately (or use different colored dice) to make sure, which hits count against the Force and which do not.

Bye
Thanee

And that would be why.
</lacks SR4A at work>

well Im not a fan of it

I scoured a bunch of books / mods finding examples of sustaining foci that were being used for a specific spell (not catagory)

and then I cam across something in street magic ...

Gear table page 185 Street Magic
Focus Formulae
Sustaining focus
Cost : Force x 1500
Availability : As Spell catagory

so ya .... wow .... Kinda sad I didnt catch that before

No, not really. SR4 p. 172 is the same.

The SR4A PDF is only $15, BTW. Buy one!

Bye
Thanee

I have it at HOME.

The description of Foci is pretty clear. And that is pretty much the first place to look for how they work.

Of course, that part is in the general description of Spell Foci, not in the specific sub-part for Sustaining Foci, so it is easily missed.

"Each spell focus must be attuned to a specific category of spells (Combat, Detection, Health, etc.) when it is created, and this cannot be changed."

Note: Sustaining Focus is a type of Spell Focus.

Bye
Thanee

and yet the reason it gets overlooked is this is a FAR FAR cry from previous editions

Yeah but in previous editions, it cost karma to put the spell in the foci. Which given how suceptible they were to being disrupted and the fact that foci were one way to ground from the astral to the physical, eh a fair trade.

Well, at least they changed the name from Spell Lock to Sustaining Focus to mark them as different.

Bye
Thanee

true ... IIRC it was 1 Karma to Lock a spell (maybe 2) and karma came a lot more frequently then as well but ya .... fair trade ....

It is not meant to be a fair trade.

Spell Locks were way too powerful. The change was necessary and is a good one.

Mages surely are good enough in SR4 still. In fact, I am still using a few house rules to better keep their power in check (like no Summoning with Force above Magic and a bit harsher Drain from Overcasting for spells).

Bye
Thanee