I understood the maximum limit...I just don't see that in the rules. There isn't any specific reference that says AFTER you have opened it, you can boost the amount....as your scores increase. This is a minor thing though.
No. Probably a little more than twice that now.
It is Certainly not close to a 100+.
Again, I will state that in most cases, you are correct. In my case, you are not.
To me the whole thing "A bit at a time" means this:
Your highest Tech and Form are (say) 10 and 11. Your max capacity is 21. You start opening the item. You can bring it up to that 21 as slowly as you wish (that seems clear). I don't see any reference that says you can change that maximum amount anywhere. If it takes you (ridiculous number warning) 10 years to fill it out...it takes you that long. From what I see, it doesn't make a reference to "if your scores change".
Now I understand what you are saying...I understand how it works. I don't see a rule that says that.
Again, this is an incorrect assumption. Try eight (8) higher. If I take this to the max, figuring an average of two attunements per object, thats 24 more attunements.
I currently have four enchantments. Of them only two are worth having (penetration, usefulness). At this point I could probably put those same enchantments in the item in two seasons, maybe four. (I didn't do the numbers and such). Now I could put the additional Vim into them and expand its capacity...sure.. and gain twenty magnitudes. Thats not too bad. I also could take a year, enchant a new item, attune it, and get two effects in it. I would still have about 100+ spaces left...
WHY, would I want to put the same effect into the same item?
[shrug] Erik what this comes down to is more or less your opinion versus mine. As I work on it I will post it so you can see the differences. I will also post the time it took and let everyone see the difference..
Fair enough?
I read the statement "The maximum number of pawns ....is equal to the sum of the magus's highest technique and highest form" as that reference It does not say "highest when originally opened". A different interpretation would bring up the sticky situation of a magus's scores increasing during opening.
To be certain that we don't have another rules disagreement in you example above you say "You start opening the item. You can bring it up to that 21 as slowly as you wish (that seems clear)" Are we both in agreement that the item has to have already been opened (and possibly been enchanted) before you can make it your talisman and before the talisman specific vis limit applies?
These two statements lead me to think that as far as my three reasons for redoing a talisman are concerned you'd fit comfortably into what I described as a starter talisman
As I've said before you probably wouldn't but the reason for you to do it is so you don't have to trash the years of work that you've already put into your talisman.
let me summarize our discussion as I've read it before you go through all of that work.
Urien: "I imagine that magi will want to make a new talisman every 20-30 years"
Erik: "I believe that magi will not want to ever dispose of their talisman unles A, it's a starter talisman, B they are dumping it for a mystery initiation or C they screwed it up."
After this things became muddled but it included the following themes:
I tried to stress the importance of the expanding capacity of talismans. You were unaware of them and you are not convinced that I am reading the rules right regarding them.
You said that someone would want to recreate their talisman to include effects of higher penetration. I said that attack spells don't belong in talismans. (There was also an exchange that annoyed me greatly about putting the same effect in an item twice when I had told you that no one would want to, but then foolishly went on to provide rationale why it could be wise in some circumstances, which lead to you talking about your personal character's increasing lab values)
You said that your character wants to junk his talisman and start a new one. I discussed why someone might not want to using what you said as an example. You provided specifics about your character and I avowed that verditious elder runes might provide a fourth reson but then offered a possibility for why even with verditious elder runes junking an old talisman for a new one might not be a wise choice.
In your last post you talked more about your character but it now seems to me that your character falls into my reasons for dumping his talisman both because it was a starter talisman and because he put low penetration attack spells in it.
We agree that my three reasons for dropping a talisman are good.
You've never said it but your statements about "a difference of opinion" indicate that you believe that there are other reasons for dumping a talisman.
I'm open to that idea but I haven't seen it yet, and my failure to agree with you is apparently (but you never can tell... stupid internet) rubbing you the wrong way.
Show me the situations where it benefits a character who has a talisman with seven components and several years worth of enchantments invested into it to junk their talisman in favor of making a new one.
Just to be clear the foolishness was on my part. I was still opperating under the assumption that the capcity of a talisman would more often then not, not be in danger of coming close to filling up.
.