I have calculated that with some preparation my players can kill Archangel Michael as presented in the RAW. And not sweating much, in fact. (As a side point I find Michael as presented to be one of the biggest jerks and sinners in Mythic Europe, but that is me).
I and the other SG IMS tend to up the power of the foes sensibly if we want them to have a tough fight, in case they chose that route. or to prevent them simply manipulating the creature into a babbling idiot. It was discussed by my troupe after an encounter with a mighty dragon ended up with us killing it in 2 rounds of combat using the RAW. We rewinded that scene and replayed it with the SG at that moment reworking some of the stuff to make it more dramatic. The beer and pretzels kind of killing flies scene we had had was so anticlimatic that we decided to do just that
After the session we worked out that we needed to up sensibly the magic resistance of the creatures we were encountering if we wanted to have true foes for the scenes we run: something we cannot simply tear appart if things gfo wriong for us. We are having much more fiun now that Archangel Michael has a might of 180 (in case we were to confront him, quite unlikely in fact) and the Virgin Mary has no recorded might to speak of. The rest of the creatures had a similar inflation in their Might, most of them doubling their RAW might score.
Hum, we seem to be agreeing overall, in the end
The differences seems to be because of tradition, and style of play or power levels. One is arguing that Might 50 is powerfull, while the other propose 180... so it's really a matter of YMMV, and the important is to have fun while playing
Flat level for wards against Might creatures would be preferable. But then, ward vs fire protects against different level on fire intensity. I also like those kind of spells. Should there be a flat level for ward against fire, and that spell gives soak equal to penetration? That would be far from the rules as they are...
Our saga's house rule is that there is two kind of wards:
against a sort of thing/power (vs metal, vs wood, vs fire, vs wind, vs mind-control, vs PeCo-like attacks, vs body-contact[punch], etc, etc)
against a sort of beings, and they are "leak-proof, anything goes" sort of ward (RAW Ward vs fearies, vs human, vs the infernal, etc) Those second kind needs to be stationnary, inscribed in a circle.
We find this an elegant solution, since Type-1 spells doesn't target things that have Magic Resistance (generally), while Type-2 does.
Also, ward against humans already have a flat level. I'm unsure if that's balanced "power-wise", because it can ward off hermetic magic (easily or not, depending on Parma levels.)
As someone who just played through a fun D&D 4e session just last night - no, not really. DnD adventures are less dungeon-crawly, but are a far cry from the open-setting player-led-plot approach you two seem to be speaking of.
I'm still advocating Arts as Abilities... really works much better, both for defeating archangels and raising the dead...
Although I see how you came to this conclusion, I'm not sure it's valid, in part because hermetic magic isn't as intrinsic to a magus nature (first thing, it needs to be learned) than a creature's innate powers. If it is, of course, you'll see an awfull lot of such wards out there.
One point of mine is that Parma Magica is supposed to be superior to all other forms of resistance, which includes might. In my view is that Wards should not need penetration versus might, but they would still need normal penetration against Parma Magica (an actually, my view isn't really "no penetration", I advocate that you do not have to subtract the level from the casting total when determining Penetration, which in essence equals no penetration). So, say I am a Livng Ghost magus with a Might of 80 and a Parma of 8 & Mentem 30 (Living Ghosts can have obscenely high Might scores if they have a great Lab Total). I come upon a Level 80 Ward against spirits, and I cannot cross it if the casting total (including Penetration) was at least 80. But wait! I have Parma Magica! That Ward needs to Penetrate at 70 before it encounters my might score. If I was just a ghost with a huge might score, the ward would stop me without question. But a magus ghost with Parma should be a little more formidable.
I will admit that one of the problems I have with wards is that they basically get three free magnitudes due to the assumption of R: Touch and D: Circle. My saga's house rule is that, basically, that bonus was the result of some Hermetic research, and that if you use any combination other than Touch/Circle/Individual, you calculate the spell level from the normal bases, rather than from T/C/I.
As a second note, given that the Communion adds botch dice, when you use it to cast a half-dozen (I'm assuming you hit at least that many based on two magi + companions + grogs), the chances of botching are getting non-trivial, at least.
I disagree. The RAW states (Core, p. 161):
This reads much like the standard magic resistance rules. If the faerie punches you, the ward stops it. If he tries to hit you with a tree, the ward stops it. If he throws a rock at you, it falls at your feet. But if he makes a hole open up at your feet, you fall. If he makes a tree you're standing beside burst into flame, you feel the heat. If he lifts a rock over your head and then lets it go, it falls on your head with whatever force it normally would.
Compared to the power of a Perdo Vim specialist who can DEO the faerie away, the ward specialist is more general, but the DEO-specialist can deal with problems on the fly and with more permanency.
Well, people "cannot act accross a ward" (p.114) against people: that's pretty clear to me. If a magus' spells is not stoped by a circle ward, then he can erase it with a simple Creo,Perdo or Rego spell.
I agree with your line of thought, but you should also admit that if this is the case, it ups the probabilities of those said mage to have mastered WC. Thus avoiding this problem. I think we need to think with a more "in game" vision here.
I agree, I was going too far when I said: "No indirect attack. Nothing."
But I also said they can do some other things, like "set a trap". Dig a hope would bypass the ward too.
Still, don't you think that's kind of "ultimate"? To get one spell that protect against that much a feary can do (powers, punch, sword, arrow, net, etc)
I prefer to confront fearies that try to lure me or deceive me, and if powerfull enough, fight me, than to see them (with some Magic Theory, perhaps?) trying some tricks to bypass my parma/ward.
Notice that a goblin firing a ballista wouldn't hurt someone warded vs feary...
Flexibility is power, my friend ! But yeah, it's more easy to defeat critters with Perdo Vim.(taking wards needs to penetrate)
Also see at p. 114. There is more precision on rules about wards there. You cannot act accross it, and can't damage the circle. That's in part why we were lead to "house rule" that only circle have such "ultimate" power: the RAW is probably like that already.
So, a mobile ward can't protect against indirect attacks, and a circle one does.
He confronted the wards versus both might 80 and parma 8+mentem 30, showing that the living ghost would be, in his game, well advised to use the later instead of the former.
Yes, precisly. The living ghost in this circumstance would be using his Parma to resist the Ward, because versus Parma I do require normal Penetration. He would not be using Might for Resistance, because according to my HR, the level of the ward would not be subtracted when calculating Penetration versus Might. However, even though he is resisting with Parma and not Might, the level of the Ward would still need to equal or exceed his might.
