Refinements for Focused Practitioners

[Sanctaphrax]

You'll be better at defence. But you'll be worse at offence, which is what you care about.

I used to worry about the balance of being un-disarmable, but then I remembered that underpants are valid foci.

[polkaneverdies]

Everybody keeps referring to mort as a focused practitioner, but the conversation he has with Harry in GS cast doubt on his classification IMO.

I don't have my copy of the book but iirc Harry accuses Mort of hiding his strength. Mort then exclaims that he didn't want to be drafted into the war against the ramps. This certainly read to me like he had thrown the wc tests like Elaine had.

[InFerrumVeritas]

You'll be better at defence. But you'll be worse at offence, which is what you care about.

I used to worry about the balance of being un-disarmable, but then I remembered that underpants are valid foci.

You keep saying this, but I'm not seeing it.  The numbers I posted don't demonstrate it, the numbers you posted don't demonstrate it (as you're equal at offense, and significantly better at defense).  Saying that it's true doesn't make it so, so could you please explain how the modified channeling is worse at offense than regular channeling?  Because I just don't see it as the case when you spend equal refresh and have as much refinement as you can get.

[UmbraLux]

I don't have my copy of the book but iirc Harry accuses Mort of hiding his strength. Mort then exclaims that he didn't want to be drafted into the war against the ramps. This certainly read to me like he had thrown the wc tests like Elaine had.

Quite possible.  Someday it might be interesting to see how many different versions of Mort could be drawn up. 

You'll be better at defence. But you'll be worse at offence, which is what you care about.

In my games, more than half of a caster's rolls tend to qualify as defensive.  Basically, any unopposed roll - almost all blocks and self, scene, and ally maneuvers.  How are you treating it?

I used to worry about the balance of being un-disarmable, but then I remembered that underpants are valid foci.

Declaration:  Skid Marks; Compel:  Not enough contact to work.     Slightly tongue in cheek but I hope your suggestion was also.  Somewhat less tongue in cheek, getting soaked in water could also be compelled to temporarily disable clothing foci.

[Vargo Teras]

Everybody keeps referring to mort as a focused practitioner, but the conversation he has with Harry in GS cast doubt on his classification IMO.

I don't have my copy of the book but iirc Harry accuses Mort of hiding his strength. Mort then exclaims that he didn't want to be drafted into the war against the ramps. This certainly read to me like he had thrown the wc tests like Elaine had.

Spoilers for GS:

(click to show/hide)

Even when pressed, he uses nothing but ectomancy.  Very powerful ectomancy, yes, but he can't make a shield without a spellcasting ghost, he can't face an armed opponent without drawing on a fighting ghost, and he's completely powerless to untie himself, since ghosts can't do that.  He's a very, very powerful focused practitioner, enough to be considered by the Fomor as just under a full wizard in terms of talent; that doesn't make him not focused.

[Sanctaphrax]

@UmbraLux:

Belial's character in my PbP game rarely casts a non-offensive evocation, because he optimized for offensive power. His character can end most fights in one shot. Which is hard to GM for, but I've managed decently so far.

My RL game does not have a spellcaster, though it's sort of supposed to.

So my limited experience suggests that it's quite possible to use only offence if you really try. I don't know if the same is true for defence.

My point about underwear foci is that unless the GM is out to disable you then you don't really need to worry too much about losing access to foci. And if your GM is out to disable you, he can do that anyway.

(Anyway, why would wetness disable underpants foci?)

@InferrumVeritas:

I'm not sure what you mean by "have as much refinement as you can get". So I'm going to ignore that part for now.

Normal Channelling +X Refinements gets you +(X+1) offensive/defensive power and control.

Altered Channelling +X Refinements gets you +X power and control.

It's that simple really. You basically spend a Refinement in order to have your Refinements apply to both offence and defence.

[UmbraLux]

@UmbraLux:

Belial's character in my PbP game rarely casts a non-offensive evocation, because he optimized for offensive power. His character can end most fights in one shot. Which is hard to GM for, but I've managed decently so far.

Perhaps because he min/maxed his casting?  Or because you haven't put him on the defensive?  Shrug, I'm just throwing out guesses.  It does surprise me you'd want to make the magic he's not using just as (or nearly as) powerful as his attacks - particularly since you say it's difficult to GM.

My RL game does not have a spellcaster, though it's sort of supposed to.

So my limited experience suggests that it's quite possible to use only offence if you really try. I don't know if the same is true for defence.

It's certainly possible.  It's possible to treat everything like a nail if you only have a hammer.    Jokes aside, some situations make attacking a suboptimal choice at best.  Whether or not those get used depends on the group.  The thaumaturgist throwing weapon 6 "potions" around is the "optimized" character in the game we're playing. 

My point about underwear foci is that unless the GM is out to disable you then you don't really need to worry too much about losing access to foci. And if your GM is out to disable you, he can do that anyway.

(Anyway, why would wetness disable underpants foci?)

The "GM is out to disable you" characterization is simplistic at best.  Have you tried carrying a staff around the city?  Into the White House?  (Our game is set in DC.)  Or even city hall?  What about the police station?  A neutral's house?  There are lots of potential reasons for not having access to foci.

Edit:  And water disrupts magic so might be compelled to temporarily disable foci which soak it up.

[Tedronai]

Edit:  And water disrupts magic so might be compelled to temporarily disable foci which soak it up.

RUNNING water disables magic.

[InFerrumVeritas]

RUNNING water disables magic.

"I make an intimidate maneuver to place the aspect 'Wizzed Myself' on 'im."

[Silverblaze]

Running water....

Taking the I whizzed myself to the next level:  Could a dog urinating on a wizards leg mitigate spell casting?

 I hope not or someone in my group is going to try that....without the dog... if you get my meaning.

[Sanctaphrax]

@UmbraLux:

He one-shots encounters because he evokes 13ish shifts at base and is not shy about going nova. But I've managed to create some decent challenges with a mixture of noncombat stuff and Speed powers and one absurdly tough enemy.

The point I've been trying to make is that my proposed Channelling edit is only better than Channelling in the situations where Evocation is already better. So I'm not creating any new false choices.

Perhaps I "trying to disable" was too harsh. Basically I just meant that you didn't have to worry unless you received a compel, and that since compels aren't bad that isn't really a problem.