[Senko]

There's a number of spells I'd want for specific situations so a sustaining focus is a possibility. What I'm wondering is (a) can I make the focus stop sustaining a spell when I want since I'm not sustaining it the foci is and (b) If I can't how far do I need to get away before it stops working and I can reused it for another different/no spell depending on the situation?

[Herr Brackhaus]

All foci can be turned off with a free action, and other conditions apply as well.

Each focus has a specific power (described under Focus Types) and must be active for you to use it. Activating a focus is a Simple Action. For a focus to remain active, it must be in the possession of the magician (worn, carried, hand-held, in a pocket or pouch, etc). Likewise, if you lose consciousness your foci deactivate. If you lose possession of a focus, it automatically deactivates and you lose all its benefits until you recover it and activate it again. You can deactivate a focus at any time with a Free Action.

To answer your specific questions:
A: Yes, with a free action
B: Not necessary as per A, but a focus automatically deactivates if you "lose possession" of it; some would argue that it's enough for it to fall out of your pocket and leave your aura for this to be true, and I'd be inclined to agree with them.

[Rosa]

I would argue that loosing possesion of a focus only occurs if it is no longer bound to you. I seem to recall a story where the teams mage cast an invisibillity spell on a drone, had a focus sustain it and then taped it to a drone. since you can essentially do the same without a focus ( cast invisibility on the drone and then sustain it yourself, and no you don't need to keep it in los to sustain it, just to cast it ) i don't see why you shouldn't be allowed to do that with a focus that you payed karma to bind Ofc in the drone example above you wouldn't actually need to tape the focus to the drone in order to sustain the spell on the drone, so i don't really know what the point of that actually was, but if you for some reason wanted to risk your focus by doing a stunt like that you should be allowed to do it, since you can do it without the focus.

[Marcus Gideon]

Yeah, losing the Focus seems more like someone taking it away. Though not necessarily unbinding it, I'd say if someone put up a Mana Barrier between you and it, that would work too.

As for the rest, the others already said you can deactivate it with a Free action. It will also deactivate when you lose consciousness, whether knocked out or simply falling asleep. So you can't use them to keep spells going forever, just daily. To make them last longer than that, you need the Quickening metamagic.

[RiggerBob]

Although they didn't reprint the "in contact with your aura" part from earlier editions, the rules tell you quite clear what being in possession means regarding to a focus.

For a focus to remain active, it must be in the possession of the magician (worn, carried, hand-held, in a pocket or pouch, etc).

So yes, a focus that slips put of your pockets deactivates...

[Reaver]

Yep.

The focus MUST stay in contact with the bonded mage in order to use it.

If you drop a focus, it deactivates automatically. However all is not lost, as it is bound to you, you can astrally track it until it has been bound by a new person or destroyed.


(Sneaky mages have learned to use this to their advantage)

@Rosa
If I recall right, the scene you are describing came from a novel. One of THE worst SR novels in terms of fiction to rules....

There have a few novels where the authors took...... extreme license to tell their story. Some other major fact/fiction slips in novels:

A DRAGON gets taken down by a light machine gun, after talking about how it took a flight of attack helos to bring down Fushwing(sp) in Germany.

A decker gets hit with Black Ice, and can log out. (An impossible task for that edition)

A mage physically astrally travelled. (Impossible without spirit help, or immortal level magics, which the mage was NOT!)

And these are just a few things that by canon are 'impossible' but made it into novels..... and I haven't read all of them....

[Senko]

How did I miss that . . . ok deactivating as a free action so you want to drop a spell and switch you can turn it off easily. Next question is reactivating it just normal spell casting?

I'm not after eternal sustaining quite the opposite I wanted to switch from spell A to spell B to no spell as the situation changed.

[Whiskeyjack]

Next question is reactivating it just normal spell casting?

You have to reactivate the focus before casting if you want to benefit from the focus. Activating a focus is a simple.

[Rosa]

@Reaver. Yeah it was a novel that's right, i think it might have one of the novels with Talon, but i'm not sure.

Also. I don't disagree that the wording in regards to foci deactivation lists those options for when it deactivates, it just doesn't make sense is all. When you compare to other kinds of magic rules, especially those for sustaining ( and for preparations and for spirits ), where they specifically establishes that once the magic link is created then you don't actually need to be anywhere near the spell in order to maintain it because the magic link is active. You would have thought that foci would work the same way, since they also function via a magic link, but thats apparently too logical, so no now you practically need to clutch it in your hand to maintain the magic link. That being said i would never let my foci out of my sight myself, but it's an odd discrepancy in the rules in regards to magic links.

[MijRai]

I will point out Fuerswching (I'm butchering the spelling as well) was a Great Dragon; the one gunned down by a Vindicator was 'merely' an adult of indeterminate age. 

[Sendaz]

@Rosa Yes and No. 

In the case of sustaining a spell the mage is still carrying the main burden themselves while a preparation/potion is a one shot 'charged' item.

A focus is more of an add-on or augment, an object with an astral framework with the purpose of linking into the mage's aura and doing it's thing.

Unlike a preparation it doesn't have a 'charge' of it's own in the normal (normal for magic anyway) sense and sort of piggybacks on the mage's aura to complete it's circuit, serving as an additional conduit for the mojo to be channelled into the mage for a variety of effects or taking on the sustaining burden, freeing the mage's attention to more important matters.

Which is why if it is removed from the mage's aura it normally shuts down, because it can not sustain the mystic connection by itself.

Now once upon a time in earlier editions, there was a special little device called a spell lock, which were specially made power focuses with a Rating of 1 made
for a single purpose: to lock a spell onto a target permanently,because they effectively had a Magic score of their own, they could maintain the tentative connection and thus keep a spell going.
However this was eventually replaced by the quickened spells which did not require a material link to tie the spell to.

[Senko]

So free to deactivate and simple to activate I can work with that thanks.

I assume the foci/contact situation probably slipped under the dev's radar because while you need to maintain contact with the foci to use it the foci doesn't need to maintain any more contact with a spell than you do to maintain that i.e the foci doesn't need to remain in LOS if you don't.

[Kiirnodel]

I think your wording is strange there, but yes?

A sustaining focus just takes over sustaining the spell for you so that you don't suffer the penalty for holding it. Otherwise it follows the rules as if you were sustaining it. The focus doesn't have any new rules or anything.

The only restriction is the one mentioned, all foci require contact with the magician (or other magic user) that they are bonded to in order to function. They deactivate if you no longer have them on your person.

[Reaver]

I will point out Fuerswching (I'm butchering the spelling as well) was a Great Dragon; the one gunned down by a Vindicator was 'merely' an adult of indeterminate age.

Very true.

But this was also at a time when all dragon regardless of age, had hardened armor.

And under those rules then the vindiator's total damage output would not penetrate its hide.

It was a scene included for the 'cool' factor, without any real consideration for the actual rules. Which is fine, authors are telling a story, they are allowed a certain leeway for creative freedom.

But, it does mean that you have to be very careful with novels if your looking for examples of rules in action.

[Rift_0f_Bladz]

I will point out Fuerswching (I'm butchering the spelling as well) was a Great Dragon; the one gunned down by a Vindicator was 'merely' an adult of indeterminate age.

Very true.

But this was also at a time when all dragon regardless of age, had hardened armor.

And under those rules then the vindiator's total damage output would not penetrate its hide.

It was a scene included for the 'cool' factor, without any real consideration for the actual rules. Which is fine, authors are telling a story, they are allowed a certain leeway for creative freedom.

But, it does mean that you have to be very careful with novels if your looking for examples of rules in action.

Yeah, the few novels I have read I don't use as rules examples, but more how the setting is described. One good example is the fluff description of improved reflexes (adept version) in Fire and Frost (I think, the novel with the goblin rigger and the building/artifact under Antarctica).