Again creating an apprentice with random results on the table of flaws and suddenly this concept starts to emerge:
-> necessary condition
-> major magical focus in damage
-> weird magic
-> warped magic
Then I read the necessary condition, and it gives examples by saying "you must do something simple". The idea I had is "raise your fist towards the sky and say something".
Inconsciously it must have made me think about a movie I saw recently (you probable know the english name; something with "masters of the universe" in the title, apparently it's an english (US?) serie well known from long ago).
And I'm just wanting this character to have a sword, and the word being something like "by the power of XX".
But since the necessary condition must be "simple", having a sword is exactly not simple: those are extensive items and not something anyone is supposed to have. Compared to "singing" or "spinning around 3 times" it feels a lot more bothersome (it means your teleportation spells wil need a requisite if that sword is not your talisman, it means you can be prevented from doing magic). So including the sword in the necessary condition is in my opinion imposing an excessive condition.
But I like my idea so I was just checking "restriction", and the flaw says: "you cannot cast spells at all under certain uncommon condition": and for this, "not having a sword" seems rather "uncommon". For a magus it's clear that a sword is not rare, and not having it is quite uncommon (in the need of it anyway).
Combining both would from my understanding mean:
-> has a sword, can do magic/activate magical item
-> + to do magic, needs to raise the fist and say the sentence.
At the opposite
-> if he has no sword, cannot do magic nor activate any magical item done by him (restriction apply to spells and magical items)
-> without raising his fist, he can still activate a magical item (necessary condition only apply to spell) but if it's done by him, he will need a sword.
If that works, the warped magic is obvious: thunder and lightning less or more close to him (in relation to the level of spell), and weird magic would be related to it again, like the striking of the lightning on him, or a random person etc.
But the main question is: would the restriction + necessary condition combination work or do you feel that it should all fall under necessary condition, which obviously is not the intended since it changes the "what he can do" part when he has a sword but do not want to raise his fist and shout (per example because he is in the middle of an inn and trying to be stealthy).
If you have an effect you want, that is probably more restrictive than those in the book, it's a - 3, -4 or -6 flaw, and works however you and the story guide determine..
Depending on if you think it is the eqivalent of 1 major, 1 major and 1 minor, or 2 major flaws, is the -3, -4 or -6 discussion.
I imagine this was not what you meant, but you asked "have any idea" and that is how I would do it.
You could change the restriction to "Hold an object over your head and say 'By the power of Greyskull!' ", so that the sword is not necessary -- a cup, a piece of underwear, a turkey leg, whatever. If the mage has an enchanted weapon they made, then the activation condition for the item might be the same, so that one condition satisfies / activates both.
Generally I would avoid stacking flaws like 'Restriction' and 'Necessary Condition', though. There is a lot of overlap, and a risk of being perceived as exploiting the flaws for 'free' virtue points.
In fact for me, and that's the whole discussion purpose, I want two things:
the character must have a sword, he cannot use magic without a sword
but having the sword is not enough. He must do something , that is raise its fist above the head and say something.
I'm not sure I want the character to always raise his sword in hand above the head, because that's weird a bit, but I'd perfectly see it into a (unique) necessary condition. But that would put this necessary conditions flaw well above the text of necessary conditions: that flaw speaks only about something you must DO, not something you must HAVE.
So for me, it's not an exploit at all but since I'm not totally sure, I opened this topic to gather information.
I could however see "having the sword" as a necessary condition in itself, but that also keeps the "not simple" counter-argument I already gave.
I'm cutting my answer in two since I didn't find how to do one post quotying multiple in this forum style (at the opposite of the old ones).
Like I explained right above, I don't want just the character to do (necessary conditions) something but also to have something.
Restriction (sword) does not force you to do anything, just "have" the sword. Necessary conditions force you to do something, but not have something.
I could in some way understand that the necessary conditions to do something with something would imply the fact that you must have something (ie the sword), but in my opinion it would make that specific set of neccessary conditions larger than what necessary conditions say it should be about.
I personaly wouldn't contest the fact that here it's well 2 distinct obligations: not be stealthy (necessary condtiion) which is a major problem and not have the life easy (because you must include the sword in every thing: teleportation, encumbrance, weakness that an enemy can use against you (destroying your sword? you are out of magic). Which would make that character make the sword a talisman, which is perfectly what I think a "restriction" for an item needed would be about.
Its giving that magus two things he never will be able to: have a sword not being a talisman survive any fight with a clever enemy (and thus not being able to do a talisman of his choosing, because a sword is not a staff) and never be able to be stealthy (until the time that magus tries to PeIm his sound and image... but second sight is already a tool useable against magi who try to be stealthy while not being good at stealth). It also prevents him to use his magic while transformed. for example, no magus turned air and casting spells from nowhere apparently.
And thank you for the exact words I was looking for.
With your sword-wielding mage, does the sword have to be a particular metal sword, or can it be any old sword, even a simple wooden training sword?
Possibly off on a tangent, but does any recall a write-up of a Verditus mage who had to have a wagon carry their casting tools, because they had what I presume is Necessary Condition that their Casting Tools (a House Restriction) had to be huge? May have been from 4th Ed.
At first I was of the "any sword" school since the sword is not something he has before being apprenticed. But due to the constraints, it will quickly become "that sword I made my talisman of because I was furious to everytime have my enemies destroy/steal my sword".
Also for this discussion, I read (I don't recall where alas, it was in passing) a magus from the books who has a necessary condition related to having something with him. So my whole "necessary condition is not related to something you have" point based on the description of the virtue falls...
but remains the fact that either restriction + necessary condition or necessary condition x2 (one of those would be my position considering the current state of thinking) or necessary condition x1 are in question.
As I explained, I think that having the tool qualifies for one (flaw major, either necessary or restriction, it doesn't really matter as I read it now) and making the gesture and sound qualifies for the other, necessary condition specifically. But I heard someone here reading it as only one necessary condition (that I think is very "hard" on the character).
but how do you trigger it to be in your hand if you can;t cast spells? If it is constantly detecting if it is in your hand (and you don;t want to be sleeping with it) that seems like a lot of warping.
Not allowed: "A Virtue or Flaw may be taken more than once only if the description explicitly allows it. Most Virtues and Flaws may only be taken once." Necessary Condition does not explicitly allow this.
Oh good catch, so back to the initial idea which is allowed.
Or work around with a greater malediction, which are always a work around for such limitations since they can do pretty much anything as long as the flaw is comparable in annoyance than the major flaw (and as a major flaw, a "necessary condition" due to a greater maldiction is quite comparable to a necessary condition due to the flaw of the name) : You have been cursed by some supernatural power, in a way that greatly hinders you. The effects of the curse should be comparable to those of other Major Flaws. Indeed, almost any Flaw could bethe result of a curse.
You are thinking about the flaw after in game. Every flaw "ingame" tends to disappear because any magus wil work around it. If you have deficient creo, you will use every other technique and never use creo. Need a healing ritual? summon a friend with a teleportation spell on him. etc.
Before the time the sword is a talisman, it is not.
And as say Bob right after: you cannot cast a spell. And you cannot use an effect of the talisman while not touching it or being at least in range.
If your talisman has a permanent InMe spell on you, you bypassed the problem. ... only to warp 1 point per year more than any other magus. It's not what I'd call a good solution because warping is a problem for any magus.
I'd look at it from another angle: When will the flaw really have an impact? For the restriction, it's when you lose your sword. For the necessary condition, it's when you're impaired in some way, such as when you're a prisoner and restrained. In this case, you likely would not have your sword. Are there circumstances where you have your sword (and it's useful to you) but cannot raise your hand? Yes, you also need to say the sentence, but that amounts to "cannot cast quietly", which is at most a minor flaw.
I'd say you get the restriction as a Major Flaw, and the fact that you also need to raise your hand is a flavorful bonus that's not worth any points. For two Major Flaws, you'd need to suffer twice as much, which clearly is not the case.
Reading all your answers, I finally decided that it was only worth of a "necessary condition : raising sword and screaming the words".To replace the "lost" restriction, I just put three deficiencies in the elements other than Auram (it's an apprentice ultra specialized in it).
And... checking that, I noticed it cannot be taken multiple time (so bad). I'll just go around and take one deficience and 2 incompatible arts in the other elements which I think is available.