Am I right or Wrong

[JmOz]

I want to know if I have been doing this wrong:

A character has a focus, let's say a magic ring (all those GL threads in Non gaming)

The ring is quite obviously the source of power WHEN IN USE (In example his Entangles come out of the ring), but during the normal day (when not in use) it looks like a simple ring.

I have always said it was an OIF, but I have been told it should be an IIF instead (and some official write ups seem to agree with IIF).

So am I wrong or is the person I was talking to wrong? I realise the GM is the final arbitrator, but would like a concensus

[Wormhole]

I'd go with the the IIF

[Blue]

OIF. Source of the power is obvious when in use is absolutely good enough.

Only example I can think off of the top of my head is actually OAF: The penguin carries an umbrella. Said umbrella shoots sleeping gas. It's obvious that the items in an umbrella, but it's not obvious it has powers until he actually uses it. Either way it's still a focus and it's still obvious.

Sidebar: Was there a modifier for an object being "concealable"? If so, you might consider that. Maybe it was a modifier for being unconcealable; if that's the case then they should take that mod if the ring was always obviously magical, and the normal bonus for OIF if it it's only obvious when used. Wish I had my book with me 24 hours a day!

[Bartman]

Sure sounds like an OIF to me.

[misterdeath]

You can put your OAF pistol in a concealed holster, and slip on a trenchcoat to hide the thing. That doesn't make it any less an OAF. In order to use it, you have to have it out and available, and so it becomes OAF.

So, using that logic, OIF. The power is obvious when the focus is used. You can't disarm the guy of it, so it's not accessible.

IIF would work if the ring is the source, but nobody can tell. That's what Inobvious means, right?

D

[coach]

OIF.

[Agent Escafarc]

I'd go the OIF route myself.

[Lord Mhoram]

Fred page 187
If a Focus is Obvious, it's clear to anyone looking at the character that the Power comes from the focus......
Some examples include most weapons (whose lethal capacities are easily percieved), a magic ring that glows whenever its used, or a shield.

There you go. Rules lawyering fodder.

[DoctorItron]

I agree with OIF because the ring has more limitations, and should be worth more points, than an inobvious focus.

The ring is obvious when in use. Villains can tell that the ring provides your powers. They can eliminate your powers by damaging the ring. It should be just as easy to target as an OIF battlesuit because it gets the same limitation. Maybe not "realistic", but it's balanced and simulates the genre.

(OTOH, as GM I might require the lesser IIF limitation if the ring is indestructible or can't be shot at for some reason.)

Another downside to obvious, rather than inobvious, foci is that you can't use them while in a secret ID or otherwise disguised. Sure, you can wear the ring in your secret ID as Joe Reporter, but as soon as you try to use a power everyone can tell that Joe Reporter is really Cool Power Ring Dude.

[Starcorp Man]

A focus's ability to be damaged has nothing to do with the Obvious/Inobvious aspect of the focus.

The ring would be an OIF, an IIF is something that is hidden, and isn't readibly detectable to an observer, a ring under a gauntlet or contact lenses or something.

[tesuji]

By the book, it is an OIF, obvious when in use is clearly an option.

Stepping beyond the obvious question to the inobvious reason for the dispute... os a ring that glows only when in use as limited as a power suit that is ovious always when worn?

I think the notion is that there will be time when the obvious weapon, the obvious battlesuit and such will be unavailable to the user BECAUSE of their obvious nature. You will not, with some battlesuits, be able to bring them with you to a fancy ball you are attending in secret ID or you might not be able to sneak the Death Blaster 2000 past the metal detectors in the court house.

However a ring that "looks like a normal ring" would get through those right away. Said ring would almost always be worn or carried and ready in an instant without a "change clothes" action required. Heck, if you do not have a secret ID, you can even use it with no concerns.

A battlesuit and such, however, are more problematic in this regard.

What then are the counterbalancing elements that make the ring get the same limitation value?

That, i think, is the source of the question. In fact, except in combat, the rings limitations are much more like an inobvious focus.

In combat, as an o**I**F it cannot normally be targetted.

Arguably, there should be three levels of obvious...
Inobvious at all times, even in use
Inobvious when not in use without concealment effort
never inobvious unless somehow concealed battlesuit, rifle

In PLAY, the way I would handle it as GM would be to have more "circumstantial" scenario effects affect the ring adversely as compared to the "more obvious" gun and battlesuit, so that the overall impact in terms of power downtime between the three is the same, as befits the similar limitation value. (The overall focus lim tells me how serious the problem is and i will use a variety of SFX to make it so, regardless of the "ring" "gun" or "battlesuit" descriptor. All saying "its a ring" does is determine which of the downsides is more prevalent, as a flavor choice it picks the flavor of the shutdowns.)

"Make a perception roll. You made it by three? Good. You notice that, as the fireball faded out, your ring seemed to be glowing strangely. It still seems to sparkle oddly now and again."

Then a moment later "You tried the ring and the command word but instead of a snare it sputters out some ash with a few singed web strands. looks like that fireball's magic has somehow caused it to malfunction."

Then "No, as far as you can tell the ring did not melt or wasn't physically damaged. its physical touchness seems to have withstood the flame fine, but it still has that intermittent sparkle and still seems to spit out ash and not web snares."

Then "How to fix it? make an occult knowledge roll?"

etc...

Overall, in the long run, its your job to make the lim matter. If they choose to make it a "harder to get to" flavor piece of gear, that just means you change the flavor of the limitations in play impacts. It doesn't mean you have to let it slip by.

[Stephen_H-G]

If the ring gives you the power it is an IIF. If the power originates from the ring as a source it is OIF.

[Syberdwarf2]

Originally posted by Lord Mhoram
Fred page 187
If a Focus is Obvious, it's clear to anyone looking at the character that the Power comes from the focus......
Some examples include most weapons (whose lethal capacities are easily percieved), a magic ring that glows whenever its used, or a shield.

There you go. Rules lawyering fodder.

Yup.

Sounds like OIF to me.

[Starcorp Man]

Originally posted by Stephen_H-G
If the ring gives you the power it is an IIF. If the power originates from the ring as a source it is OIF.

Actually that would be incorrect, it has nothing to do with the Obvious/Inobvious aspect of the power, the Universal/Personal option does.

[Talon]

OIF, but with concerns similar to those raised by tesuji. Such a ring /could/ be chosen by power-gamers just because it's a better OIF than a battlesuit; in such a case, the GM might need to provide minor drawbacks as a counterbalance.