[Splinter thread] I have a problem with the way it is done: Dispel Foci

[JmOz]

Re: [splinter thread] I have a problem with the way it is done: Dispel Foci

 

There might be some other mention of it' date=' but I think what people are referring to is the off-hand mention of how Dispel affects objects. This is in the Dispel description in the Powers section (H5, p99). It goes on to say that [i']Independent[/i] powers which are in objects are destroyed by a Dispel, and can't be repaired unless the GM allows it to be.

 

It does not explicitly say that this applies to focuses, and there is normally a distinction between focuses and "found" objects, but it does specifically mention the Independent limitation, which rather implies that the objects being referring are powers bought with the Focus limitation. I could, course, be wrong.

 

And when it comes to Independent I am fine with that normaly, as Independ id I beleive the most limiting of limitations at -2

[zornwil]

Re: [splinter thread] I have a problem with the way it is done: Dispel Foci

 

Probably worth adding from the FAQ:

 

Q: What happens if a power in an ordinary, universal/breakable, Focus is Dispelled? What if there are multiple powers in the Focus?

 

 

 

A: If a power in a Focus is Dispelled, you should look at the special effects involved to determine what happens. For example, if the Dispel involves breaking the Focus, it probably requires some repairs — maybe just quick field jury-rigging, maybe something more — to get it working again. If the Dispel involves sucking all the battery power out of the Focus, the Focus needs recharging before it will work again. And so on.

 

If only one power in a multiple-power Focus is Dispelled, that power ceases to function until repaired/restarted/whatever, while the other powers remain unaffected.

 

Are there other references? As pointed out, the ref. on page 99 is just in regard to Independent foci.

 

I'm actually thinking this is all okay, then.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: [splinter thread] I have a problem with the way it is done: Dispel Foci

 

As pointed out, the ref. on page 99 is just in regard to Independent foci.

 

I'm actually thinking this is all okay, then.

That's the way I've always understood it, and played it.

 

BTW, Independent Focuses *CAN* be repaired - it just costs character points. Remember that "repair" is not a rules mechanic, it's just a "SFX" - or a description of an in-character action. A magic sword with Independent that is "destroyed" might, depending on SFX, GM ruling, and plotline appropriateness, might just become an ordinary sword - maybe dinged up a bit, dulled, stained with smoke, etc. - but possibly a still fully servicable, albeit normal, sword. It could be remade into its former glory by someone spending character points.

[Guest bblackmoor]

Re: [splinter thread] I have a problem with the way it is done: Dispel Foci

 

Are there other references? As pointed out' date=' the ref. on page 99 is just in regard to Independent foci.[/quote']

 

No, it is quite explicitly in regard to objects. There is then a clarification of how that basic rule is revised if the object is a power bought with the Independent limitation. Focuses are not mentioned at all, although it would not be unreasonable to infer that focuses are affected like other objects.

[zornwil]

Re: [splinter thread] I have a problem with the way it is done: Dispel Foci

 

No' date=' it is quite explicitly in regard to [b']objects[/b]. There is then a clarification of how that basic rule is revised if the object is a power bought with the Independent limitation. Focuses are not mentioned at all, although it would not be unreasonable to infer that focuses are affected like other objects.

But page 99 says "If a character uses Dispel against an Independent power in an object or item...(and is successful)...the item is ruined or broken and cannot be fixed (unless the GM allows it to be)."

 

Otherwise it says above that a successful attempt "the target power...stops working"

 

I don't see another reference, though there is some implication from the statement on the next page as to "Unbreakable Foci are Difficult to Dispel (x16) solely for the purpose of resisting Dispel"

 

Given the FAQ comments I quoted above, I don't see where there is an explicit statement that an object is outright broken, precisely, nor do I see a clear implication even that the object couldn't be (as the FAQ indicates) jury-rigged to work partially or wholly, depending upon SFX.

 

PS/EDIT - so would you please cite specifically whereof you speak?

[Hugh Neilson]

Re: [splinter thread] I have a problem with the way it is done: Dispel Foci

 

I don't see another reference' date=' though there is some implication from the statement on the next page as to "Unbreakable Foci are Difficult to Dispel (x16) solely for the purpose of resisting Dispel"[/quote']

 

I'm inclined to knock that one out at the same time as any rule which would break non-independent focuses as the result of a successful dispel.