What??? I can pretty much guarantee that's nothing close to typical. Personally, I've seen a lot more Superior Construction than all those put together. I've also left out the season-free servant I could have added for another +1ish to Safety. How many of these scenarios that give Safety -3 to start are at all typical? (Remember, this isn't just the covenant, but the lab itself. For example, the covenant may be a thoroughfare, but that doesn't mean the lab is, and the lab itself must be for this Flaw.)
No, no. You've misread something. You have +7 to the specialization and -2 to General Quality for a net +5. You don't get to sometimes ignore General Quality:
General Quality adds to all Lab Totals. This bonus (or penalty, if the General Quality is negative) applies in addition to any other Lab Total adjustments (such as from Specializations).
Lesser Focus nets +1 to your specialization at the expense of -1 to everything else.
Greater Focus nets +2 to your specialization at the expense of -2 to everything else.
You know 3 is the standard, right? 5 is high-ish, but a fairly common high-ish - not really a low-aura setting. And I mentioned both grabbing a Servant and that Safety -3 is highly atypical. As it's not until 6 or maybe 7 (all Aura or some negative Safety thing) that we cannot handle this so quickly; up to there we can manage this without much trouble. It's really only in the extremes you're looking at (Yes, 6ish for an average Aura and Safety -3 Flaws are both extreme.) where we run into real problems.
That's why I put my comment at the end. I usually use multiple, small labs with a dedicated servant or two. It avoids so many of these issues and it means much of the upgrading of labs takes no magus-seasons.
I remember locating a reply from the author a long time ago but I can't locate it...
"Greater Focus: An existing Greater Feature is the overwhelming focus of the lab, enhancing the Feature, but making activities that do not involve its use more difficult."
I see the argument stating that a net +2 instead of a +4 in the specialization is not making it more difficult. Still, it makes it much worse then the +3 that the greater Feature gives without any drawbacks. Was the intent for the flaw to grant an addl +2 at the cost of -2 for everything? Seems overly costly
I wonder... I only played games where the Aura's were always 5+ when PC's had the choice to find a site... How many of us chose to set the main PC convenant in a 0-3 magical aura? 7 might be on the high range of all aura's but my perception is that for a campaign, PC end up closer to that than 3.
And I agree, overwhelmingly, we all lean toward forgetting to add safety hazards when designing the convenant. A bit because the campaign start usually does not use the convenant rules. Partly because the implementation of them would put the work so far of the PC's in jeopardy and the troupe decides not to apply the -3 safety hazard for the disruptive spirits (Gremlins) or the bottomless pit (-2 safety) or being underwater (-2). There are many listed in the convenant book but I don't think many get to be used yet I think it is a core element of the book to balance high aura settings that if used properly would see us settling more often in lower auras... I think this aspect should be located in the core rule book & then convenant can come to the rescue with lab safety
For what it's worth, auras over 5 are supposed to be unusual choices for covenant sites, because such high auras are hazardous. They Warp the covenfolk, and implicitly have other potential effects. If the rules mean that experimentation is too dangerous in those auras, then that is a desirable side effect, not a problem.
My lab in play is +18 Safety and only +2 of that comes from enchantments to improve Safety (I recreated existing items, otherwise wouldn't have done it). Unless you are trying not to, safety will generally end up being high for any lab in which you use the rules in Covenants for.
As for Aura, our Covenant has the Magi located on the Magic Aura 5 level, even though there was one level with a Magic Aura 6 (and now there is an even deeper one). The top level of a Regio if you are very magically active tends to be unstable and dangerous. If its Aura goes up or even worse if a split happens all kinds of bad stuff can occur. Warping everyone on it enough to send Magi into twilight, along with all the contends being scatter shot across two levels, were our biggest deterrents as Magi.
The fact that it would have warped our covenfolk and had activities happening around the anchors of the Aura also contributed. Later after the split and the Aura 6 level being stable it just wasn't worth the effort to try to move the Magi there. That level is tiny in size (the Aura 3, 4, and 5 have been expanded by Hermetic Architecture) and so we use it to house plants and animals of Virtue to free up space on the lower levels.
Nice story but lets look at the lab examples of the convenant book p.123.
Lab safety values
-1, 0, -7, 0, 0, +1, 0, -2, -3
So.... a lab @ +18 safety would take us well beyond the presented normal of the rule book. Is it indicative of a rule problem, some kind of exploit that PC's should just avoid or the typical in the wild lab safety value?
Almost feels like labs should be designed as antagonists, wild beasts that need to be tamed & that none should be designed with a positive safety unless it serves a story hook. Atleast, it seems to be how convenant presents them...
The whole lab including enchanted items has been posted on the forums for almost three years now. The single biggest contributor is Refinement (adds +7 Safety in my lab). If you have appropriate craftsmen as part of the Covenant then you can get Superior Tools and Superior Equipment without the increased Upkeep, which also adds +2 Safety. If the building the lab is in is created by magic you can get Superior Construction which is another +1 Safety. Servant is a cheap way to get a bonus to Safety.
The examples are good for showing a broad range of options but all but one have +0 or +1 Refinement, several have a LOT of Size which is detrimental to Safety, and things like Decaying/Damp/Lightless which would rarely be taken in play are very common.
-1: Decaying and no improvements. Not a Lab most Magi would ever use.
0: Decaying, Lightless, little improvement. A "scary" lab, for the beginning Perdo specialist who wants that. Working in it would be difficult.
-7: A ruin abandoned for a long time. Damp, Decaying, Uneven Floor, Unstable, Vulnerable, Wreaked, etc. Not something you will see as a Magi's lab in play.
0: Visitor labs with drawbacks. Cramped is -2 Safety and not something you will often find in personal labs.
0: Disorganized, which is the opposite of what you will often find (Highly Organized). With a little work this would be a fine lab for a Herbam specialist though.
+1: Size +6 (!!!) and only Refinement +3 for an Archmagus lab?! It is designed specifically to get high Aesthetics (+15) rather than being a working lab.
0: This is a field lab, rather than one at a Covenant. Good example of setting up something at a site to study it though.
-2: Another lab that could be described as a field lab. It is just setup in a cave with no improvements. It has Health -8 which is like living in a garbage dump. It will cut 40 years off a Magi's lifespan.
-3: Poor quality everything, infested with webs, low ceiling and uneven floor, bad heating and lighting. For almost any task this lab is worse than a default all 0 lab.
Almost all the examples seem to go for flavor, picking really out there combinations and lots of flaws. Half are ether decaying messes or a rough field lab. All but the Archmagi's have little to no Refinement. None are a good example of what you will generally see in play.
