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

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?

I would say you can’t 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

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:

I agree with Tisoz on the spell lock issue.

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.

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 who´s at a different location no were in sight? In case that is still possible, I would say the spell is independent of it´s caster to some degree. Of course that doesn´t 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. I´d 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 don´t have to remind me that no sensible magican would abuse foci these ways. It´s to dangerous and expensive to loose them. But it´s fun to speculate.

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.

'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.

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.

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

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.

No, Tisoz, you are not proven right by your references. We are, in fact, referencing the exact same passages to prove our very seperate points. That makes it an interpretation difference, as I have stated repeatedly now. I have not ignored your canon references, as I assume (and hope) you are not ignoring mine. The simple fact of the matter is that it does not say 'when a spell is in a sustaining focus it is completely out of the caster's control', neither does it say 'when a spell is in a sustaining focus the caster can still direct it'. The rules simply do not say.

I beleive my interpretation is the superior, but there is absolutely nothing I can find in the book to say for sure. You may beleive yours is the superior, but there is absolutely nothing I can find to support that position for sure either. A sustained spell would not (technically) go away when the caster falls asleep or unconscious, so long as it is maintained by a sustaining focus (I would rule that it would vanish, but a quick search turned up no positive reference to this being the case). Would you be able to control the spell while asleep? No, no you wouldn't, that's just a silly suggestion. I have no idea where you got that "By your interpretation" wackiness, but it wasn't in any of my statements. As far as I'm concerned the 'unconscious' thing is far from what we are discussing and unnecessary to either of our interpretations.

And that just makes me think you're completely misreading my posts. The mage is not sustaining the spell, the focus is, the mage is directing the spell. I'm fairly certain I made this clear.

Why does the sustaining focus wipe away TN modifiers for actions while sustaining a spell? Well, because it's a sustaining focus. That's what it does, that's all that it does. You pay karma and money for the specific priveledge of having a sustaining focus do exactly this. How hard is it to think 'Levitate spell go up!', or 'Levitate spell hover!'? If it requires enough effort to make doing other things difficult, then I suggest that you are doing something wrong. The distractions implied with sustaining a spell yourself are the effort of channelling mana and keeping the spell active, which the sustaining focus then takes over. The actual comands to the spells require little to no thought at all.

The mage HAS to have control of the spell. He casts it. He doesn't just suddenly have the focus grab ahold of mana and shape the spell, he actively casts the spell through the focus and takes drain from it.

My reading of that is that it, is that the focus takes away the need to consciously hold the spell.

Doesn't mean he can't influence the spell, or that he's cut off all connection to it, just means that the focus keeps it going.

Since there's no penalty increase for sustaining a levitate spell and moving, compared to sustaining an armour spell, I would say that controlling levitate is no harder than chewing gum or some other trivial task, so I don't see why applying any extra penalties for controlling it with a sustaining focus would make sense either.

Since the focus is linked to them and part of their aura while active, it just makes sense to me that it holds the spell, and they manipulate it as they want.


In fact, just realized this, there's an implicit requirement that the mage maintains control of the spell. He can turn it off at will, without dropping the focus. Hard to do if you've got no control over it

The reason we're defaulting to the mage controlling the spell is because the rules say the mage controlls the spell. Sustaining Focii never change this... nothing in the rules say the focus controlls the spell. If it did say that, it would work as you say, doing exactly what it was cast to do (in the case of levitate, you'd just float in place).

JaronK

You can't CONTROL a spell sustained by another mage can you? Even if you are the recipient of the spell you would still levitate where the other mage wanted you to go. The same thing applies to the focus. The focus is now sustaining the spell. Even if you are the one who cast it you do not control it any longer. It is treated as if another mage is sustaining it.

So this means you do not get a free ride to somehow CONTROL 5 or 6 illusions while levitating all around while reading a book.

The levitation can be set, but it would be as I stated earlier. If you were moving upwards when you gave CONTROL of the spell to the focus you would move up with no more concentration on your part. You would NOT be able to stop the levitation direction as the CONTROL of the spell is now slaved to the focus.

Yes it is a good analogy. It is the only one that makes sense. Or you could have hundreds of detailed illusions under your control, levitations, etc..., why not take a nap? You are not devoting any of your concentration to guide these spells according to what some want us to believe. And spell focuses can be placed on mundanes to give them bullet barriers etc... Should they get to control the levitation? There is a penalty to concentrating on a spell for a reason. Once you place it in the focus you are giving up CONTROL. You do not get to change it around anymore.

And there may or may not be anything in cannon. But it is likely that the designers knew that spells like levitation could not be used in sustaining focuses. They are for bullet barriers and such. Not anything that requires concentration to use. And this is a good change to add to canon if it is nt there.

Back that up with a canon quote then.

The TN penalties come from the strain of sustaining the spell itself, not from concentrating on it and adjusting it. Otherwise spells like Armor and Camouflage would not incur the TN penalty, because they do not require alteration after casting.

I don't know where you are getting these 'hundreds of detailed illusions' from. The spells sustained by a Focus have to be cast on a person or object to be valid. That eliminates most Illusions from being useable by a Sustaining Focus.

Funny thing is, all this is irrelevant for Levitate. Let's look at the spell description:

Ok, forget the illusions. I have 12 sustaining focuses. I am going to cast levitate on each one. According to you, I can control the spell I cast. So my team is going to do the swan ballet suspended in mid air while I CONCENTRATE on studying astro physics. Since the focus does all the work somehow...See how stupid this sounds? You have to think past a simple levitate spell to show the abuse potential.

Rory, your first post and the comments therein relied upon a change to the stated canon rules, which is fine for a houseruling, but completely tertiary to a discussion of what the canon implications of the wordings are. Your analogy, as Fortune said, is a bad one. The sustaining focus does not cast the spell, the caster does, the focus maintains the spell, keeping it fed with mana, chanelling the various energies into the actual result of the spell. This says nothing, and I'm repeating myself ad nauseum here, nothing about whether the castor loses control of the spell when he casts it into (SR3 wording) a sustaining focus.

Can you have 5 or 6 illusions active in sustaining foci, be gliding around on a levitate (in a sustaining foci) and be reading a book? Sure, why the heck not? If you want the focus addiction problems, you can have it. Hundreds? Where'd you get all that karma, and what kind of idiot activates hundreds of foci at once?

Wait. I just gotta see if I can organize your thoughts for you.

Alright, mental excerise outfits on people Time to sort out how a sustaining focus might work.

From Canon, we have:
1-it maintains a spell.
2-focii are magical and tied to their bonded's aura

Now, for the sake of making everything nice and easy to deal with, we'll treat spells as a complex shape that the mage has to keep locked in his mind to sustain -- hermetics might invoke magical symbols and patterns into a complex shape, shamans might have something else, norse runes for a Loki shaman, a complex structure of stones and art, whatever. It all functions as a mana construct that is the spell.

To sustain it, the caster must maintain the construct by holding the spell in his/her/its mind, which means that part of his attention must be on the spell, to keep it from fading. If he doesn't concentrate on the spell, it breaks down, the mana falling into natural flows around the mage, and the spell ends.

Now, because sustaining focii are tied to the spell, and only sustain that spell, we can think of them a little like a framework that when the spell is cast, holds it. If you want a way to visualize it, we can say a bunch of tubes that the mage fills with water/mana, that shape the spell.

Because the focus is tied to the mages aura (since it's a link to the mage, and bonded with karma), that the mage can cast the spell into the focus so that the spell does not require him to sustain it. The spell is still in his aura, still part of him, because the focus is part of him. (Again, it's a valid link for him, so it must contain part of his aura) So, you have a mage who's still got the spell going, but the spell is not decaying and ending without him holding the spell in his mind. He's still aware of the spell, it just doesn't break down.

Now, as far as controlling the spell.. The mage not lost access to the spell, as it's still being maintained by something within his aura. The mage has not lost his skill with sorcery (obviously). The shape of the spell simply isn't breaking down and fading like it would without the sustaining focus. It doesn't require him constantly holding it and dividing his attention. He does something else, and the shape is still there when he directs his attention towards it.

Now, for spells that are not just on/off.. Do different tasks require variations of the spell? Does going 'forward' with levitate require the spell to change it's shape? Does going up or down? Since there are not multiple spells, the answer is obviously 'no'. So changing the spell's shape isn't necessairy.

Therefore, we can infer that there's some other mechanism for controlling how a spell works. Since the focus is part of the caster's aura, the spell is still within his aura, and so, we can infer, the control of the spell is still in the aura.

Oh my god, never before had I thought of how game breaking it would be to have a mid-air, magical reproduction of "Swan Lake." Despite all the posts people have made, I have yet to see any reasonable arguement for why sustaining a spell suddenly means that you have no more control over it.

As for hundreds of illusions running around while you sleep, I have no problem with that, if you somehow have hundreds of sustaining foci active. Those illusions will keep doing whatever it was you told them to do before you went to sleep.

Well, it is late here. I have to sleep. Tomorrow I will show you that you are wrong.

In the meantime can anyone tell me how they plan to make exacting and advanced manuevers with 12 levitated friends while studying calculus?

If anyone has ever juggled you will understand what I am saying. You just can't focus your mind on that many different tasks at once. There would be a penalty regardless of what rules lawyers dig up. It is just too sensless otherwise and I have yet to be convinced.

I can't recall if it's actually in the books, but doesn't it take a simple action to move around with a Leviatate spell? So all you need are 12 simple actions, and you have your ballet production.

To dissociate from Rory's 12 strawmen ballet, there is nothing in the description of Sustaining Foci that says they alter the nature of the spell. Levitate moves things where you tell it to. So if you put Levitate into a Sustaining Focus, and then don't tell it to go anywhere, then nothing happens. I think that telling a Levitate spell where to go is a simple action (don't have my books), so if you've got multiple people sustained, you're going to be keeping yourself too busy spending simple actions juggling them around to read that Calculus book.

The fallacy of Rory's posts is that he's somehow gotten it into his head that not having to concentrate to sustain them = not having to concentrate to use them. Let's hope he clears himself up on that.

No mention of a simple action to move in SR3. I assume it's a free action because it's never stated otherwise. Is this errata'd or cleared up somewhere in MitS?

A few things about Rory's Strawman post(s)...

*Isn't the number of Foci a mage can use limited to Intelligence?

*Sustaining Foci can only hold spells cast on a person or object. Independant Illusions that interact with the environment would not qualify as such.

*Focus Addiction becomes a factor when a mage uses more than twice his magic rating in Force worth of Foci.

As was said by many people, absolutely nothing at all in canon backs up your assertion that a mage loses or turns over control of a spell when he chooses to sustain it with a Focus.