Yes.
Then again: turn yourself, your grogs, your familiar into living steel (Minor Focus, rather than the Major Focus "written material" supposedly is) and any spell you cast on yourself and them benefits from said Focus. Incidentally, the spell to turn folks into living steel obviously benefits from the Focus too.
Truth be told, being constantly "steel" requires an ongoing magical effect, so it may be slightly more inconvenient than being constantly covered in writing. Then again, going around covered in (mundane) writing is itself something of a serious inconvenience. Good luck keeping the unfortunate grogs ... and your familiar happy about it.
It used to be unclear. And then the books specifically stated that a Focus in "ships" (or something like that) applies to any enchantment at all invested into a ship (or whatever the term was). So we do now know for sure it is allowed.
And a Major Magical Focus with
ships benefits the magus with any effects
enchanted into his magical vessels.
Hermetic Projects p55
Since there is no reason to think that a focus in "ships" is in any way special in this regard, by extension the same reasoning must apply to other foci.
Hmm. I think it's a terrible design choice. Every Verditius would then have a Minor Magical Focus in a small, portable item (rings?) or common material (steel?) and effectively apply it to everything he makes.
Thanks for pointing it out though... a second time! Apparently you already had a few years ago, but my subconscious rebelled and made me forget
Of course, if you go with this rule, the fact that a (major!) focus in written material would benefit most enchanted devices, is not really unbalancing per se vis-a-vis any other focus that could benefit an enchantment. But that's beside the point.
The difference is that a Verditius swordsmith with a focus in sword, is a limited concept. So is a silversmith with a focus in rings. A Verditius with a focus in items full of writing can make both rings and swords and cloaks and hats and whatever. Writing tends to make items posher, and when it does not you can usually hide it on the inside, so no inconvenience.
Not really, as I see it. A Verditius with Minor Focus in ... gold can (by the "ship focus" RAW) benefit from his Minor Focus for any object into which he embeds some gold (by restricting his enchantment to the golden part, see the ruby example in the corebook). That certainly makes items posher than being covered in writing (in medieval times being covered in writing is creepy rather than posh), and easier to disguise. And, again, let me stress that we are looking at "Written material" as a Major Focus.
I find my proposal quite elegant and avoid the issue of stacking many bonus unduly
he he he...
But after all, the OP is looking for comments, so up to him to pick up which ever suggestion suits his Saga the most.
The most important point is that player and ST get on the same wavelength and set upfront the limits, to avoid disappointment later on and possibly having to retcon a house rule/saga choice that had unforeseen consequences.
Literature being defined as any written material that can be used as a Source Quality for learning.
So, a note or letter to someone is not literature, nor are words woven into a carpet or a word or three written in ash on your arm. A stone stelae that can be studied for Area Lore is literature.
Alternatively, a Minor Magical focus in Scribing would cover books, scrolls, letters and such, but not engravings, words painted on canvas or woven into tapestries. It could also affect the activity of Scribing, such as scribal Craft Magic.
Why do you think there are canon initiations for MMF in wooden wands and swords in House Verditus, exactly? Do you often design magic to target enemy and friendly wooden wands? Enchant them to point at someone, on the other hand...
I am not sure what your question means, exactly. The way I see it is that a Minor Magical Focus in swords should benefit a magus enchanting an arbitrary item with an effect dealing with swords; it should not benefit a magus enchanting a sword with an arbitrary effect.
This makes perfect sense for a confraternity of swordsmiths. As a mage-smith, your focus helps you make enchanted swords that cut through any magical wards; that fight on their own; that are supernaturally sharp, or shrouded in flame; that one can hide in a pocket, or call to one's hand from any distance with a command word. Your focus doesn't help you make enchanted swords that teleport you, shoot lightning bolts, or turn you into a badger, though of course you can instill those powers - you just get no bomus from the Focus when doing so.
Also, your focus on swords means you probably try to do everything with swords: if you want to fly, you probably do so on top of a throne of conjured swords; and instead of Circling Winds of Protection you probably know Circling Swords of Protection.
That seems to me far more balanced for a Minor Focus than a "Focus on every possible enchantment, with the minor constraint that the vessel must be a sword". It is also more "aesthetically appropriate" for lack of a better term.
As for "wooden wands", if we rule out any of the ... metaphorical interpretations that keep my troupe constantly grinning and chuckling as if 13-year olds, it is indeed a strange and very narrow Minor Focus (particularly considering that Wood is itself a canonical Minor Focus in the core book). But then, it is taught by the Confraternity of Himinis the Mad; which indeed initiates another Major Virtue that no sane magus would want. So, I would not really give it that much weight.
It's a bit of a weak argument to dismiss the value of a virtue as non-existent because it belongs to that confraternity. It's not that different from a "Magical Focus with Familiars, which applies to all spells and laboratory activities that affect familiars, either their own or those belonging to other magi" from the same book.
I've seen back and forth discussions of this over the years about Shape/Material foci, and though I have my own beliefs, I am really wondering what the original authors and Captain Chart had intended.
Hermitic Magic doesn't understand writing or information. (Which is an irritating restraint when magically copying books potentially causes errors in the text. It should then result in a perfect copy, like reproducing a photo. But I digress...) But to current magic theory, writing on some object doesn't confer some special property, you're just painting on it with a limited palette. Magic understand books, as they can be described by physical properties that magic does deals with. But it would affect a learned tome the same as a collection of childish scrawls and meaningless gibberish.
Instead, I tried to point out that your argument "well, why would magi initiate minor focuses in swords and wooden wands if they did not apply to all enchantments? They'd be so weak!" seems to fail on three grounds.
The minor focus in swords is not really weak; it's in line with many other minor focuses - and it makes a lot of sense for a Confraternity of swordsmiths.
The minor focus in wooden wands does appear weak - but this is due to its being so very much narrower than an existing minor focus, regardless of whether you allow it to apply to all enchantments in a wooden wand.
Both the minor focus in wooden wands and the major "curse virtue" of the confraternity of Himinis appear a pretty bad deal, so the explanation of why they are should be sought in what they have in common - being virtues of the confraternity of Himinis the Mad.
I hope this is clearer now.
It is profoundly different, in at least two important ways.
First of all the magical focus with familiars is Major.
Second, what you can enchant in a familiar bond is quite limited, namely stuff that affects solely the familiar and/or the magus (the latter under the control of the familiar). This is much narrower than what you can put in a wooden wand (which can also give to third parties), and also much closer to the idea that a focus in X can only affect X - there's just a little stretching to include effects, under the control of the familiar, that affect the magus through the familiar bond.
Taking a Major Focus in Familiars is mostly a waste of virtue points, since
"Foci that cover the familiar apply to the
investment of all powers, no matter what they
do." (ArM5 p105)
so a Minor Magical Focus in whatever kind of animal you have as a familiar will usually apply more often.
I already understood your argument. And Bind Curse can be awesome when you have a decent lab total
We'll disagree on the assessment of a focus in all possible non-warping constant personal effects as being limited.
That's a fair point, and I've heard some rate it as minor, but sometimes you start the saga without knowing whether the familiar you want will be a cat. I like not knowing what my familiar will be until I meet something I can't live without, personally (although I've had one or two characters which were pretty clear on what they want). Nonetheless, I think the comparison between a focus into everything enchanted into the familiar bond with a focus into everything enchanted in the enchanted item to be a mostly fair one.
