| From: | Mongoose <m0ng005e@*********.COM> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Expendable Spell Focus are Inexpensive? |
| Date: | Fri, 5 Feb 1999 15:38:23 -0600 |
:---Keldon Mor <Keldon@********.NET> wrote:
:>
:> I know this may take more paper work but how about instead of
:> Force, use bonding cost? This would then take into account Power
:> foci over spell foci, etc. Allow something like Magic rating x 4 in
:> active foci = to their bonding cost? Just a thought...
:
:There's a big problem with that. It is possible to use Enchanting to
:reduce the bonding cost of a focus. It is also possible to REALLY
:reduce the bonding cost if you make the focus yourself. For your
:suggestion, you'd have to use the bonding cost straight from the table.
There' that, but using "stock" bonding ccost is simple. Also, when
you go over the limit (BTB, total rating: here, total bonding cost) you
make a magic test VS total Foci rating to see if you risk magic loss. I
guess you would not HAVE to change that, as this still makes the karma
intensive Foci riskier.
:But if you do it that way (base it on table cost), it actually makes a
:lot of sense. It means there's a reason to get Spell Category foci,
:and even Specific Spell foci. But I'd put it at MR*3, and even that
:is rather unbalancing if you only get Sustaining Foci and Specific
:Spell Foci.
Not so much for the sustaining foci- a spell lock is "converted" into
a rating 3 sutaining foci, which is kind of what started this thread.
Mongoose
