Major Magical Focus: Enchanting

After a long time away, we are starting up a new Ars game. One of the players is making a Verditius. Is Enchanting too broad to be a major magical focus?

Too broad IMO.
Its like saying Major Magical Focus: Spell casting.

One of the examples is Metals or Stone...

So...Metals would cover making swords, armor, jewelry...(?)

Remember, as SG you have to live with it, so be...cautious. My Verdi with his Minor focus, apprentices, familiar and such, can generate 140-150 lab totals in his best arts...Thats only with a narrow field, but his other totals don't drop that much... :blush:

Also, IIRC, it specifically says you can't Focus on lab activities...
but the focus can apply to lab activities.

You really want to FOCUS on something.

I'd say yes. I might even say that focusing on a specific type of enchantment such as charged items is too broad (but imagine the penetration totals).

I think that enchanting jewlry or enchanting staves/wands would be acceptable as a minor.

I'd have problems with someone who has a major focus in metal using this bonus to enchant circling winds of protection in a gold ring. I think that the magical focus of that sort should only apply to the magic in question not to the medium that you are enchanting.

An alternative is to start the character off with some minor verditious mysteries such as verditious eldar runes and reforging rather than a major focus.

1 Like

I agree that Enchanting is way too broad a choice for a Focus, but I disagree with what you have stated here.

A focus in metals would only apply if the magical effect being invested has something to do with metals. It does not apply simply by virtue of the object being enchanted being metal, regardless of the effect being invested.

I suspect that this is not a freshly gauntleted magus. :slight_smile:

I think a focus in "Metals" would need to be EITHER casting spells to do with metal or enchanting spells to do with metal, I'm not sure I'd even allow "Enchanting Metal" as a focus....

I agree Focus on Enchanting is too broad, or else , Verditius mages would all have it. Plus it specifically states you can't under "Major Magical Focus".

Major Magical Focus is supposed to cover an area "smaller than a single Art".

Aren't laboratory activities explicitely excluded from possible magical foci?

Metal or Stone is listed as a Major Magical Focus on page 45 in ArM 05.

But does that only apply to spells dealing with said material or would it also apply to enchanting anything in that material?

Personally I'd say the 1st

Makes sense. In ArM 4th ed, the affinities work with the effect not the medium. If I have a terram affinity, I get a boost to the Terram Art, not with putting an Ignem effect into a metal wand.

I understand the Focus to work something simlilarly (sp?)

Wow. Thanks for all the quick replies. I hope I didn't hit a sore spot.

In our last game, we had several extreme characters, with (minor) foci ranging from "visual imagery" and "dogs" to "creo corpus rituals" and "sleep." I am still trying to get a feel for what is appropriate for each type of focus.

The Raw does say a Focus applies to Lab activities.
Limiting a Major Focus to either spell research involving a focus ,
or enchanting items related to the focus ,
puts it more towards a minor focus imo.

The RAW specifically states: "When you cast a spell or generate a Lab Total within your focus..." under Major Magical Focus, and "When you use magic within this field..." under Minor Magical Focus.

There isn't any ambiguity as far as I am concerned.

Continuing with the hypotetical focus in Metals: enchanting a metal object with a Creo Ignem effect is neither using magic within the field nor generating a Lab Total within the focus.

This is an old thread, but it looks like the closest for my purposes. The subject was never really settled in the thread, but after reading the Mystery Cults book, I have an answer.

In the Verditius section there are 2 Minor Magical Foci listed, swords and wooden wands. Therefore, regardless of the effect you are investing, if the object is covered by your focus, then it applies.

Therefore if you have a Major magical Focus of Metal, your focus will apply for all metal items that you enchant.

I believe it should also apply for working with the item, e.g. any spell to create/effect metals.

The question I was looking for was whether the focus of "rings" was too broad. The rings in question are jewellery rings (gold/silver etc.) - not ring duration effects.

Mehhhh, I disagree.

I agree with the premise, but not the conclusion.

Both "swords" and "wooden wands" are far, far more narrow in scope than "metal". And it's the limit of scope that's the factor here.

While, in theory, any effect could be put into a sword, and quite clearly nearly any could be put into a wand, wooden or otherwise, those foci severely limit the application of the focus.

And that is what is being sough after, that limitation.

I would say that "rings" might (possibly) be acceptable, just as "silver" or "iron" might (possibly) be. But "metal" is just far, far too broad.

I wasn't arguing for metal as a focus, just that if it were, it would apply to enchanting metal objects, as well as spells effecting metals.

Iron or silver works just as well.

But metal is narrower than a form. It's part of Terram. Page 45 of the core rulebook lists "metals" as an appropriate Major Magical Focus.

The question isn't whether it is an appropriate focus but more on how that can be applied. If we have examples of "swords" as a focus, it makes sense that the focus can be applied, like it or not, on all magical activities connected with swords.

The virtue itself decides on the breadth of the focus and once we have that we can follow the rules as written. So, if a device is made from metal (as opposed to being carved from stone or moulded from clay) then the focus applies and the enchanter gets the bonus from his focus.

If a focus is considered by the storyguide to be too broad to use in lab activities, pick another narrower one that still fits with the character concept but there's nothing to say (given the swords example) that Focus (metals) can't apply when enchanting a silver device with an InVi effect say.

I see these as Major, Minor, Inappropriate and Minor respectively.



I apply focuses when the spell invested falls under the scope of the focus of affect directly an item falling under the focus's scope.

So, a focus in sword would apply to create swords out of thin air, Sword-Shaped spells (such a a sword of fire), Blade of Virulent Flame, or a spell designed to let a sword cut through parma. It wouldn't help with an Aura of Rightfull Authority spell designed to make people fall in awe with the wielder of the sword.

This is maybe narrowing down the focus, but it helps a lot.

1 Like

I do see your logic but given that a focus represents just that, a single focus (remember, a magus cannot have more than one). I'm not often one to extend leniency where virtues are concerned but I think this is probably the right place. Otherwise, how else do you model a character's unerring ability to enchant swords with whatever effects he desires?

As for the possibility it may break a certain game balance, well, you get to play one magus at a time, so make the most of it.