[FST_Gemstar]

Just wanted to throw out a little dilemma I am having in making a stealthy/social adept. While I really like the benefit of tattooed qi foci, I am feeling paranoid that having more recognizable physical features is a big liability. Would they affect impersonations/disguises? Especially ones that may have some seduction involved? Would they be problematic if caught on camera or actually caught? Am I being too paranoid here? Are there any ideas of how to scar, tattoo, etc. qi foci that are less noticable or bland?

Thanks for your help!

[Whiskeyjack]

1. Tattoos are incredibly prevalent. Unless you make it super distinctive with an NQ it's not really a big concern in terms of making you more memorable on a mechanical level. You could probably take Blandness even with a lot of tattoos and just look like some generic tattooed street tough. Plenty of high-population illegal groups, from gangs to organized crime, have particular tattoos. You could be a member of such a group, and hide in plain sight, or impersonate the tattoos of these members, which could be handy but also cause trouble if you have particular Triad tattoos and are in Yak or other-Triad territory, for example.

2. There is no rule that says disguising, whether mundane or magical, affects the ability to use a tattoo qi focus. So cover it up under make up and it will still work, but of course, like all foci, if active it will be visible on the astral.

3. Unlike the magic tattoos in L5R, qi focus tattoos do not need to be visible or exposed in order to give benefits.

I always do tattoos for qi foci if it's a focus I will never need to upgrade (e.g. getting Astral Perception). I wouldn't get it on something like Combat Sense 1 because you can't just upgrade it to 3 later. I find foci are best for the powers you want to have access to on occasion, or which require activation, versus ones you want on all the time (like Combat Sense or Improved Reflexes).

[halflingmage]

The best answer is ask your GM.  For those with a hardcore black trench coat approach it might be a problem.  If I were running it I would not clobber you with it too much, especially if you have the disguise skill.  With advanced tech I could see the typical makeup kit coming with skin emulation patches or some such, probably first developed to cover scars or burns, that would make them all but invisible if you needed to cover them up. 

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

I confess to disliking anything that cannot be removed with a few moments' effort.  Think of it, not tech-wise, but thematically - getting tattooed is NOT a pleasant experience, and it's arguably true that tattooing a qi focus tattoo is going to be done in the most traditional manners, because a mechanical assist might screw with the mana, which would mean that it's going to take a boatload of time, and a crapload of discomfort.  Then, should it be disenchanted, it has to be stripped out and re-tattooed - much, MUCH more discomfort, as well as a real possibility of disfiguring scars.

Depends on your style, but at least for women I prefer earrings.

[Top Dog]

I confess to disliking anything that cannot be removed with a few moments' effort.  Think of it, not tech-wise, but thematically - getting tattooed is NOT a pleasant experience, and it's arguably true that tattooing a qi focus tattoo is going to be done in the most traditional manners, because a mechanical assist might screw with the mana, which would mean that it's going to take a boatload of time, and a crapload of discomfort.  Then, should it be disenchanted, it has to be stripped out and re-tattooed - much, MUCH more discomfort, as well as a real possibility of disfiguring scars.

Nothing says the Qi focus has to be big, and while tatooing may not be the most comfortable of experiences, people have been doing it for ages, so it's not that big a deal.

If you Qi focus gets disenchanted, it's a problem. Not (just) because of all of the re-tatooing and such, but because you have to have someone performing magic on you, while touching you (specifically the focus), for hours. If you get out of that with only a destroyed focus, I'd say you got lucky. Meanwhile, every other focus just requires the focus to be in the enemies' possession. Which is one of the big benefits of a Qi Focus - they can't be stolen, ever, because doing so would destroy the focus. People might still opt to destroy it (or you) for whatever reason, but at least you don't have to worry about people that want to steal your foci.

Hiding a tattoo is easy - put it on your back, and wear a shirt. Or put it somewhere more obscure - the soles of your feet, for example. But that brings us to the biggest drawback of foci - you can't hide them from the astral, and you can't opt not to bring them along with you. That's not that big a deal, though - any place that allows adepts probably allows (perhaps disabled) tattoo foci as well. Any place that doesn't allow adepts - well, you have to disguise that anyway (although foci do make you slightly easier to spot). If you want to hide yourself, Masking is what you need, and that allows you to hide foci as well.

[Hobbes]

I confess to disliking anything that cannot be removed with a few moments' effort.  Think of it, not tech-wise, but thematically - getting tattooed is NOT a pleasant experience, and it's arguably true that tattooing a qi focus tattoo is going to be done in the most traditional manners, because a mechanical assist might screw with the mana, which would mean that it's going to take a boatload of time, and a crapload of discomfort.  Then, should it be disenchanted, it has to be stripped out and re-tattooed - much, MUCH more discomfort, as well as a real possibility of disfiguring scars.

Depends on your style, but at least for women I prefer earrings.

What kind of third world prison did you get your tattos!?!?!    : )

Yes, tats that cover a lotta skin take a long time.  And yes, healing time and possible infections and all that, but really get a 3" Pikachu tramp stamp.  Takes a couple hours, colors and all.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

I confess to disliking anything that cannot be removed with a few moments' effort.  Think of it, not tech-wise, but thematically - getting tattooed is NOT a pleasant experience, and it's arguably true that tattooing a qi focus tattoo is going to be done in the most traditional manners, because a mechanical assist might screw with the mana, which would mean that it's going to take a boatload of time, and a crapload of discomfort.  Then, should it be disenchanted, it has to be stripped out and re-tattooed - much, MUCH more discomfort, as well as a real possibility of disfiguring scars.

What kind of third world prison did you get your tattos!?!?!    : )

Yes, tats that cover a lotta skin take a long time.  And yes, healing time and possible infections and all that, but really get a 3" Pikachu tramp stamp.  Takes a couple hours, colors and all.

I have a counter-question: why do you assume that a magical tattoo can be implanted by way of modern, mechanical tattooing gear with no issue whatsoever?  I'm not saying that it can't, but as I said - in bold above - it is thematically appropriate (because of the potential to screw up the magic) to return to old traditional non-mechanical techniques to implant the enchanted inks.  I personally would apply a penalty to the enchanting/tattoo roll if modern methods were used.

If you Qi focus gets disenchanted, it's a problem. Not (just) because of all of the re-tatooing and such, but because you have to have someone performing magic on you, while touching you (specifically the focus), for hours.

... not for hours.  For an instant.

To break a focus down into reagents and totally destroy it, a magician must have touch contact with it. Breaking down a focus requires an Opposed Disenchanting + Magic [Astral] v. target’s Force (+ owner’s Magic if bonded and if the focus isn’t yours) Test.

It's a straight opposed test - no time, no nothing except for the need to be touching the focus, in this case the tattoo.  THAT would require a touch attack, which I'd personally describe as a combination of a purposeful Touch Attack (+2 dice) and whatever penalty is required for that particular area on a Specific Target called shot.  The intent, of course, is to disenchant, so at the moment of contact the dice are rolled.  If the attacker succeeds, your tattoo's magic goes kablooie (and, I would rule, no reagents are recovered).  No 'hours' are necessary.

[Top Dog]

If you Qi focus gets disenchanted, it's a problem. Not (just) because of all of the re-tatooing and such, but because you have to have someone performing magic on you, while touching you (specifically the focus), for hours.

... not for hours.  For an instant.

To break a focus down into reagents and totally destroy it, a magician must have touch contact with it. Breaking down a focus requires an Opposed Disenchanting + Magic [Astral] v. target’s Force (+ owner’s Magic if bonded and if the focus isn’t yours) Test.

It's a straight opposed test - no time, no nothing except for the need to be touching the focus, in this case the tattoo.  THAT would require a touch attack, which I'd personally describe as a combination of a purposeful Touch Attack (+2 dice) and whatever penalty is required for that particular area on a Specific Target called shot.  The intent, of course, is to disenchant, so at the moment of contact the dice are rolled.  If the attacker succeeds, your tattoo's magic goes kablooie (and, I would rule, no reagents are recovered).  No 'hours' are necessary.

Last line of the next paragraph (still on the subject of disenchanting foci):
"This process takes a number of hours equal to the target's Force".

So yes, it takes hours. They could have written it more clearly, but still.

[Whiskeyjack]

I confess to disliking anything that cannot be removed with a few moments' effort.  Think of it, not tech-wise, but thematically - getting tattooed is NOT a pleasant experience, and it's arguably true that tattooing a qi focus tattoo is going to be done in the most traditional manners, because a mechanical assist might screw with the mana, which would mean that it's going to take a boatload of time, and a crapload of discomfort.  Then, should it be disenchanted, it has to be stripped out and re-tattooed - much, MUCH more discomfort, as well as a real possibility of disfiguring scars.

What kind of third world prison did you get your tattos!?!?!    : )

Yes, tats that cover a lotta skin take a long time.  And yes, healing time and possible infections and all that, but really get a 3" Pikachu tramp stamp.  Takes a couple hours, colors and all.

I have a counter-question: why do you assume that a magical tattoo can be implanted by way of modern, mechanical tattooing gear with no issue whatsoever?  I'm not saying that it can't, but as I said - in bold above - it is thematically appropriate (because of the potential to screw up the magic) to return to old traditional non-mechanical techniques to implant the enchanted inks.  I personally would apply a penalty to the enchanting/tattoo roll if modern methods were used.

First it's not as if "old school" inking techniques are going to take infinitely longer.

Second, monofilament whip weapon foci are a canon Thing, and made with no penalty or extra expenditure of time or resources. If this isn't an issue then I see no reason why making a tattoo focus with modern tattooing needles would be an issue. What matters is the person doing the job not the tools they're using.

There's also big enough demand that this is not going to be an impossible thing to find even with the stricture. That's folded in to Availability.

But hey if you want to be needlessly punitive at your table, do what you want.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

Hm.  Top Dog,  I ... don't believe that applies to the actual disenchanting; I believe that applies to the channelling of the magic into creating reagents, which SHOULD take time - but I don't believe the actual disenchantment takes any time at all.  YMMV, of course, and I do see where you get that from, but as that note comes after the 'you can channel yadda yadda' bit, I would expect it to apply to that step and that step only, especially since the test for the actual destruction just says 'if you succeed, it's destroyed'.

I have a counter-question: why do you assume that a magical tattoo can be implanted by way of modern, mechanical tattooing gear with no issue whatsoever?  I'm not saying that it can't, but as I said - in bold above - it is thematically appropriate (because of the potential to screw up the magic) to return to old traditional non-mechanical techniques to implant the enchanted inks.  I personally would apply a penalty to the enchanting/tattoo roll if modern methods were used.

First it's not as if "old school" inking techniques are going to take infinitely longer.

Second, monofilament whip weapon foci are a canon Thing, and made with no penalty or extra expenditure of time or resources. If this isn't an issue then I see no reason why making a tattoo focus with modern tattooing needles would be an issue. What matters is the person doing the job not the tools they're using.

There's also big enough demand that this is not going to be an impossible thing to find even with the stricture. That's folded in to Availability.

But hey if you want to be needlessly punitive at your table, do what you want.

First, I never said it'd take infinitely longer.

Second, here's the thing: yes, if you're playing Missions, 'poof it's done', congratulations, you got the gizmo if you can acquire it via availability, etc.  That's fine.  And if you play in that manner, that's fine too; that's your choice.  If you're not playing Missions, and if your GM is interested in what shadowjack has been emphasizing, immersiveness, then whether or not the thing is likely to be enchanted is going to become a whole thing.  See, Enchanting goes up against the Object Resistance of the item (telesma) you're enchanting.  A monowhip is one of those 'highly processed objects', and so your Artificing + Magic gets opposed by your formula force + 15 (or more!!) dice, which makes it far less likely for some enchanter to just throw together an enchanted monowhip than, say, an enchanted knife or sword.  So the chosen item is important, and unless you're abstracting everything and just letting them say 'I want to buy X', and rolling dice then saying, 'it takes you Y days and Z nuyen, and now you have X', then yeah, it does matter.  (I'd also be interested in finding where a monofilament whip focus is found in the book - yes, you CAN make one, but I'm pretty sure nobody in either fiction or examples has.  Not really the point, though - yes, you can make one.  Yes, it's effing difficult.  And honestly, no, I wouldn't charge only its cost for it, I would charge commesurately for that 15+ dice opposed test difficulty, but playing blandly by-the-book, hey, you can buy just such a thing.  Go to.)

"But what about inks?"  Hey, inks are about as low-tech as you can get, right?  So that's a low Object Resistance.  Yes, sure it is.  And no, there are no clear rules for the time it takes to tattoo the inks into you (or even whether that's part of the enchantment itself), or whether or not using a technological method to implant them is going to do anything bad.  So sure, your argument holds a complete bucket of water, and if that's how you want to treat your world, that's fine - you can stroll down to the talismonger's shop, buy some 'ink du Astral Perception Qi Focus 4', zoom over to the friendly neighborhood tattoo artist and select 'blazing skulls' as the design, and he'll just zap 'em right on.

I prefer not to do that.

I prefer immersiveness; I prefer to tell a story, even when it comes to the 'sideline things', because to me, and in my experience, that's what makes the world interesting, what makes it real to the players behind the characters.  That sort of thing helps people to treat the character as a character they play, not as a sheet of technical information they game against the system.  I want them to sit in the sweat lodge for days while the shaman who is preparing their tattoo lays the ink into their skin.  I want them to listening to him chant as he tap-tap-taps the wood or bamboo or whatever under their skin, leaving the ink behind, weaving the network of the magic; I want them to be a PART of it.  I want them to have to help the master sword-smith for the first three days of him making their sword.  I want them to have to help their contact get the hard-to-get item for them, whether that's running interference with a shipment, or playing bodyguard while he negotiates.

I want them to have fun, and I want it to be interesting, so I don't want it to be a 'you talk to the fixer; you get the run; you talk to a contact; you do the run; you get paid; you buy stuff; you talk to the fixer; you get the run ...' loop.  And this sort of thing is how I do it.

If that doesn't work for you, fine, but please don't imagine that it's punitive, needlessly or not, because it ain't.  Don't confuse 'flavor' for 'screw you'.

[I_AM_ZHOUL!!!]

Just wanted to throw out a little dilemma I am having in making a stealthy/social adept. While I really like the benefit of tattooed qi foci, I am feeling paranoid that having more recognizable physical features is a big liability. Would they affect impersonations/disguises? Especially ones that may have some seduction involved? Would they be problematic if caught on camera or actually caught? Am I being too paranoid here? Are there any ideas of how to scar, tattoo, etc. qi foci that are less noticable or bland?

Thanks for your help!

To the OPs original point... Yes, you can gets tattoos that are easily covered and won't bother Disguise. If you are going to need to hide that you are awakened you'll need Masking Metamagic anyways which will cover Initiate Grade in Foci anyways. Deactivating a Focus takes Los which as the tattoo should be hidden means that they would have to be Astral to do it, & Disenchanting the Focus is going to take Hours... not something that can be done in Combat.


As far as a bunch of the other things that have been said... A. I have made a Monofilament Whip Weapon Focus, it's a pain in the ass but can be done (just accept the fact you need a way to stay conscious through it)
 B. The Ink/Powder is the actual Telsma not what is used to tattoo you. Depending upon your Tradition or Outlook maybe you would need to have the older ways of doing it but a Chaos magician isn't going to matter either way. Just remember that the old ways only can really do big shapes, even the Yakuza where they use color & shapes instead of geometric shapes like everyone else are big pieces that takes up whole limbs. They can tattoo a koi fish just not a little koi fish... and when magic formula & rituals are online in the Matrix, kind creating a false dichotomy when saying that Magic can be incorporated with modern ways of translating it.
C. The actual rules for a full disenchantment is to break it down into reagent components is the only way to fully disenchant a Focus. It is a full on Astral Construct bound into an item with Karma. It's not something that a quick disenchant roll makes go away. Similar to the difference between dispelling a Sustained Spell as opposed to dispelling a Quickened Spell, try dispelling my Force 12 Quickened Increase Reflexes spell with 12 Karma spent to Anchor it. You'll fail and probably come close to killing yourself for trying, just like it almost killed me to cast in the first place. Anything that you spend Karma on... the game makes very hard to take away from you.

[FST_Gemstar]

Thanks everyone for your responses. This discussion on disenchanting is confusing me more though on the value of foci...

It looks like, just to deactivate someone else's focus you need line of sight of the focus from the physical or astral plane and roll an opposed disenchanting + magic [astral] vs focus force + owner's magic. This makes sense to me as a combat strategy and is appropriately difficult. Someone could just reactivate the focus their next pass.

To "break a focus down into reagants and totally destroy it" (SR5 core  p. 307),  also requires an "opposed disenchanting + magic [astral] v. target focus's Force (+ owner's Magic if bonded and if the focus isn't your)." So, this is the same test as the one just to deactivate, but requires touch, not just line of sight. As it says the next sentences "If you succeed in this test, the focus ceases to be. The telesma at the heart of it disintegrates and is unusable." You can then later do an alchemy + magic [astral] test to turn some of the released mana from this destruction into reagents. The paragraph ends with "This process takes a number of hours equal to the target's Force." As I read this, it is the harvesting of reagents that takes hours, not the destruction of the focus, as reagent harvesting does take time when doing it regular.  If the test was to take hours equal to force of the focus to destroy it requiring a lot of otuch, I would think it would perhaps be written as an extended test something like a Disenchanting + Magic (Force x owner's Magic, 1 hour)

This is just feels like odd rules to me then, with the difference between just deactivating and utterly destroying a focus is just whether you are touching it or not. I guess touch is difficult in combat, and you shouldn't be letting magicians get close anyway...

[Top Dog]

The reason I think it take Force hours to destroy a focus is because, reading the second paragraph, it starts with "If you succeed in this test, the focus ceases to be" and ends with "This process takes a number of hours equal to the target's Force". That, to me, reads like the hours duration also applies to the succeeding on a test bit, and thus on the whole process.

I do agree that it's not unambiguous - it's not unreasonable to assume that last line only applies to the harvesting part. Really, they should have had either no paragraph break, or one just before "The mana released from...."; that way it would be unambiguous.

Anyway, having two options which are both, in my opinion, reasonable interpretations of the text, the main reason I'd pick the Hours duration is balance. Utterly destroying a focus, in an instant, seems rather overpowered to me, especially since the test is no harder than deactivating the focus - both being a Disenchant + Magic v. Force + Magic test. Granted, destruction also requires touch, but that doesn't really seem like a proper counterbalance for destroying something that costs thousands of nuyen and potentially double-digit karma numbers.

[The Wyrm Ouroboros]

You guys do realize that SR is not inherently a 'balanced game'?  That things can be destroyed much, much faster than they can be created?  All you need to do to wreck a focus of any type is break the item it's made out of.  You might have the world's strongest Power Focus, but if it's in the form of a fragile willow wand, it'll take a troll street samurai about a quarter second to turn it into so much kindling.  What keeps that fate from most foci is that they're either very tough to get a hold of (see the 'targeted touch' suggestion above), and tough to physically destroy.  What you spend karma on ... no offense, Zhoul, but the game doesn't give two pips about.  If I spend 100,000 nuyen and 15 karma on your crazy monowhip weapon focus and leave it on the bus, and some damn snotnose punk wiz-ganger picks it up and happens to have 15 points of karma, I'm gonna lose my karma when he spends his to bond it.  That's the way this works; the game doesn't make it any more difficult for him to bond it (and you to lose your karma) than it made it for you to bond it in the first place.

IMO, it is clear that destruction must be a hands-on thing, but it neither requires a full salvage operation (as Zhoul claims) nor an extended period of time.  Since being hands on with an adept - actually getting tangled up mano a mano with him - is generally considered a bad idea, the actual risk is relatively low - and as you say, Top Dog, if they got their hands on you, they can do lots of worse things than just pulling off your ring or disenchanting your tattoo.  The only sort of person who is going to try doing this solo is either a martial mage with a daredevil complex, or a mystic adept with some serious skills and/or confidence - because in order to do this, you need to be ABLE to Disenchant, and that's the province of Artificers (meaning, in general, full mages and mystic adepts).  Not to mention you get kicked in the teeth by 1S per hit rolled against you, but you're basically trying something against someone dangerous, with a tough shot just to touch the thing, AND running the risk of damaging yourself whether or not you succeed.  As Gemstar says, this isn't something you should be letting mages do anyhow - or, really, something mages should be crazy enough to try in the middle of combat against a frickin' adept.

But hey, there are crazy, self-confident people everywhere - and if you succeed, you should certainly consider it a victory ...

[Top Dog]

If you're dumb enough to leave your monowhip focus on the bus, it still takes (Force) hours for the new person to bind it. Which is fine - all that time you can try to find the focus (which shouldn't be that hard, you still have a connection to it). If you can't within the hours set, tough luck. And that's what I'm saying - if someone has your force for a couple of hours to do stuff with, fine, tough luck. But it shouldn't be instant.

Nothing you pay karma for is taken away that easily in game. It's possible, sure, to loose karma-based stuff. You can get NQ's, pay PQ's, loose essence. But all of those take some time, or some really bad luck, or sustained action or inaction. Foci - at only hours - is the easiest to loose. But it shouldn't be instant - and especially not with a simple instant  Magic + Skill v. Magic + Force roll. Yes, there's not too many who can attempt it, but that's besides the point; they're not hard skills to learn.

~~

I was looking at the text a bit more, and looking at how it's described makes it more even clear that you can't seperate the destruction from the harvesting. The whole section on focus destruction begins with "A focus can be effectively recycled, [...]. To break a focus down into reagents and totally destroy it [....]." The text treats the destruction and harvesting as the same action, not two seperate ones; you don't destroy a focus, then harvest the leftovers, but you harvest reagents from a focus, destroying it in the process.