Duel Focus Items

[bitterpill]

I was thinking of giving my focused practitioner Aeromancer in one of my games two Gauntlets focus items, one of them at +4 (the limit of the characters Lore) Control Air Attack and the other at +4 Air Power Attack, what I was wandering if I could legitimatly use both focuses in the same attack, and is doing so bending the game mechanics or being unfaithful to the source material.  

Also could a rote command be in sign language or in say of gesture languages like the language of Fans. 

[Sanctaphrax]

1. It's fine.

2. I'd allow it. But this one's up to the GM.

[devonapple]

Also could a rote command be in sign language or in say of gesture languages like the language of Fans. 

If you are trying to establish a sneaky way to make your magic less identifiable, you may want to buy a Stunt that allows you to use your Perform skill instead of your Lore as the difficulty for other spellcasters to identify and counter your magic?

The potential Dresdenverse problem with using sign language, or any language, is that you risk unintentionally shooting off your magic when all you were trying to do was communicate in that language. In an actual game, though, I doubt a GM will be that picky about it. You could also opt to take an Aspect "Fan-Wielding Spellcaster," in which case you could Invoke it for awesomeness or subtlety, and the GM could compel it for... complicated things.

[Fenrir423]

The rules don't really say one way or the other, as far as I can find, whether you can cast a single spell with multiple focus items. While I'd leave the decision up to the GM and not argue with either decision, I'm not entirely sure why the board seems to unanimously agree that the intention is to allow multiple focuses to be used in casting ridiculously powerful spells.

[UmbraLux]

The rules don't really say one way or the other, as far as I can find, whether you can cast a single spell with multiple focus items.

YS:250 uses "focus items" (plural) under 'How to Do it'.  That said, I don't believe bonuses of the same type stack (couldn't find the reference) so most casters are limited to two focus items for a single spell - one for power and one for control.  This is also one aspect making Sponsored magic so powerful.  A wizard could presumably stack a Hellfire focus on top of a Fire focus because they are different types.

[LokiTM]

Using the fiction as a reference, I would not allow the use of two foci on the same spell. Harry uses the shield bracelet , or the rod, or the staff but never more than one at a time. It also seems like a balance thing.

[Sanctaphrax]

Your Story page 279 says that multiple foci cannot stack in increasing power and control. There is no indication whatsoever that you can't have one focus for power and one for control.

Then again, the rulebook contradicts itself (and Our World) on the preceding page. So maybe the section ran into editing trouble and needs to be extensively interpreted.

PS: The fiction is not a good reference.

[LokiTM]

I am not claiming it to be authoritative, just giving an opinion on how I would rule were it my game.

Again on the personal bias front, this feels like power gaming which I am trying to discourage in my game. If there is one thing that is not worrying me, it is that the wizards are too under powered. 

[Sanctaphrax]

Heh. True. Maybe this could be a sneaky way to nerf wizards.

[bitterpill]

My GM said that he was not sure about using more than one focus item but if i could find a way to explain how someone would actually wield two focus items at once he would allow it. Which is why i thought the idea of paired focus items like gloves  might work to explain how someone would use two focus items in the same action. I am tryinging to out wizard the wizards of my party in a submerged game with a Focused Practitioner.But I suppose really interested in is whether people think trying to use two focus items is power gaming and I should drop it. The Language of Fans casting I just thought might be cool.

[arete]

I have always intrepreted the rules to mea you cannont use more than 1 item to benifit a spell.  I find wizards do not need the help.

[Sanctaphrax]

1. I don't see the need for a special justification for using two foci. Your character realizes that two is better than one, just as you do.

2. Evocation will almost always be better than Channeling once you add Refinements. You might be able to out-evoke a wizard, but not an evoker.

3. The question "is this power gaming?" doesn't mean anything to me in this context. Power gaming (at least as I understand it) is defined by motivation, not action. Also, it isn't necessarily a bad thing to powergame.

4. While it is true that wizards don't need help, I still can't work out where the idea that you can only use one foci comes from. Seriously, why do you think that?

[arete]

I got the idea from your story page 279.

[BumblingBear]

The book specifically mentions that if you have one focus item that adds +2 power to offensive water evocation and a +1 power to offensive water evocation (*note:  I don't remember the specific wording - I am paraphrasing) that the item with the larger bonus would be in effect.  They would not stack to a +3.

Logically, we can conclude that the book is assuming players will have many, many foci.  As such, we can also conclude that a player could have more than one foci to be used for one spell.

There is no rule in the book stating that one spell cannot use more than one foci - just that power and control for more than one item do not stack.

Additionally, one item can have a power bonus for more than one element of evocation.  How in the world would that be beneficial unless a caster also had other focus items to supplement that?

I really don't understand why people are even arguing about this.

In the books, Harry only really has refinement foci because he has a buttload of power with very little control.  He doesn't need to worry about conviction.

Other wizards (like Elaine) on the other hand have many, many doodads and gizmos to help with spells.  Didn't Molly use two wands too?

I see no reason why a spellcaster could not use more than one item.  If a GM really wants to nerf casters that badly, they should just run a lower level campaign.

I have looked at "Our World".  The author lowballed the stats for most of the NPCs in there, and any one member of the Senior Council could nuke a small country.

It may make some people uncomfortable how much power spell casters can sling around, but that is how the DF universe works....

Sort of like how a Demon with Mythic strength and Claws will be swinging an 8 shift weapon every attack.  Without any stresses.  In conjunction with their attack.

That level of damage is sick.  A demon with that level of power could tear through a tank without too much trouble.  If characters are going to survive stuff like that, they are going to have to escalate their power accordingly.

Nerfing PCs is only appropriate if the opposition is not up to match.

When the nearest we have to a beastiary lists NPCs that don't even have stats, just a warning to "run away", I don't think that any nerfing is appropriate.

[TheRealMe]

I was under the impression that a Lore of 4 would get you a total bonus of 4 in all foci.  That is, one +4 device, or two +2, or a combination of +3 and +1 for something else.  But not two (or six, or twelve) +4 foci.

Am I mistaken?

- Ed