Call for ArM5 Errata

Games Discussion Ars Magica
233

Actually, it's totally correct. Go read page 105 and you will see what I said is true. As for the rolls you present, as a general rule RoP:F doesn't specify if Realm Interaction is used or not, rather than your claim that it necessarily doesn't. Let's take the one place where it's explicit instead:

Magic Theory 3 in a Faerie Forest with Aura 5 and Sympathy +2 in deer (and 0 in all other relevant values).

Under RoP:F rules, if I use the Sympathy Trait, I roll to experiment with 10 + experimental bonus.
Under FaF, if I use the Sympathy Trait, I roll to experiment with 10 + experimental bonus.

RoP could be more explicit and should be. I don't disagree there. I'm just pointing out they don't actually disagree; some people have just been assuming one option from RoP:F that FaF shows is the incorrect of the two options.

Again, you're basing this on a lack of a clear statement in one part and continuing to ignore a statement in another part. As I showed above, in the one place where it is explicit and clear, you get the same result, not vastly different results.

I'l quote it for you:

This describes the characterā€™s relationship to a particular class of subjects ā€” usually a subset of one of the ten Hermetic Forms that also describe Faerie Might (Animal, Aquam, Auram, and so on). It cannot apply to an entire Form, or even the majority of targets associated with a Form. It might be circumstantial, similar to the Special Circumstances Virtue, or cover a variety of concepts like a Minor Magical Focus (see ArM5, page 46, for examples).

Look there. Usually (though, like "healing," not necessarily) a subset of a Form. How small a subset? Not a majority. So capped just below 50%. Minor Magical Focus is capped below 20% of a Form, no broader than a TeFo combo. Major Magical Focus is capped below 100% of a Form. So anything in that [20%,50%) region is invalid for a Minor Magical Focus and is valid for a Sympathy Trait.

As for women, "women" covers less than 50% of Corpus because we have women, men, and others like babies who are not considered either. So it is valid by RoP:F.

Yes, I know your quote, too. And if you read it again, it doesn't say anything about limiting the Sympathy Trait to the breadth of a Minor Magical Focus. It says you can take a broader, overlapping one and gives a comparison of what broader and overlapping means: just like a Major Magical Focus can be broader and overlap a Minor Magical Focus. For example, a Major Magical Focus in "fire" would be broader than and overlap a Minor Magical Focus in "controlling fire." Similarly, a broad Sympathy Trait in "people" would be broader than and overlap a Sympathy Trait in "women."

234

If you want to get sticky with science, nearly 2% of the human population is born intersexed. Not as an identity thing. I mean physical genitalia and/or internal organs.
But in what universe are babies without gender?

235

No. RoP:F never states that mundane rolls aided by Sympathy become Supernatural Ability rolls, being thus influenced by supernatural Auras. It just states that they become stress rolls, and incur one Warping point per botch. Which is very different.

It similarly never says that, a negative Sympathy trait makes all the mundane rolls of a character Supernatural ability rolls. It just states that it adds a number of extra botch dice, regardless of aura, to all rolls -- and a penalty if the negative Sympahy is applicable.

The fact that it never says "by the way, do not be tempted into thinking it all turns into a supernatural ability!" is not a valid argument: because the default case is that nothing of the sort happens.
Thus, either book needs to be addressed in the errata.

1 Like
236

Babies are not born without gender, but the terms "men" and "women" usually implies adult individuals in typical English usage.
A girl isn't a woman, though both girls and women are female humans.

237

No. Let me try to be clearer.
"The bodies of women", i.e. "women" under Corpus, is valid by RoP:F, because it's slightly less than half the Form of Corpus, though it is questionable whether it should be valid as a "narrow" or "broad" focus.

But women in general -- which includes interacting with their minds, their magics, their reputations etc. (this is what Feminine Sympathy covers) is far, far, far broader. If I can't make this clear, I'll just give up. I hope however that the need of errata is clear.

238

I don't think barbarian languages such as English make for a good tool of analysis here.

2 Likes
239

Huh? "Women" does not include infant girls, toddler girls, etc.

You're misreading what I wrote. It never says they don't, either, does it? That's just your supposition. I'm the one saying it says neither, so people were picking between two options. It wasn't until F&F where the choice was made clearer.

However, F&F gives consistency. Why? RoP:F only gives us one specific case, and in that case they do become Aura-influenced, and influenced as strongly as Hermetic magic is influenced by auras. Also, the picking up of Warping Points for botches is consistent with the Supernatural rather than something remaining mundane; you would get the same Warping Points based on core rules if the Ability were now Supernatural.

Not saying they become influenced by the Aura is different from saying they do not become influence by the Aura.

Yes, I would agree if you let it go nuts it gets too broad. I don't see that as a rules issue, though; that's an SG issue. Let's say I choose "visual images" as a Major Magical Focus. Sound reasonable? Well, people, animals, plants, objects, etc. have visual images, so I can use my Focus on all of them, too, since I can see them. Similarly, the spell a woman casts is not itself a woman.

Minds, sure, as those are parts of the women. But how broad is it really now? "Women" is probably about a quarter of Corpus, maybe just slightly over, since there are women, men, children, fetuses, corpses, skeletons, etc., with women, men, and children covering the majority of it fairly evenly. With Mentem we still have women, men, and children, but there are all sorts of intelligent animals, intelligent other things, and spirits of all sorts. With all spirits, there is more non-woman/man/child Mentem than Corpus. So "women" should be a little under a quarter of Mentem. So it looks near the limit of 50%, just needing a judgement call.

I don't see the problem except with an SG letting a player run rough-shod over the rules.

242

(Folks, if I may raise a humble plea... please, let's not clutter the thread. I selfishly want David Chart to work on it as efficiently as possible :slight_smile: A few back and forths about whether something is right/clear/fixable etc. are fair game. But ... Litlle Women?!?)

2 Likes
243

Superior/excellent tools (C&G69-70) are stated to "add a bonus to (a specific activity|every activity) that the item is used for".

  1. This appears to include adding to Totals and rolls, rather than only to rolls (e.g. a superior anvil might give +1 to Workshop Total when forging horseshoes, or an excellent forge might give +2 to Workshop Total for any smithing type crafts), although most of the examples are for rolls, not Totals. A notable exception is "Superior armour grants the user a +1 to his armour's protection value".
  2. On p69, middle column, "Tools allow the crafter to add +1 to his roll when he is making a specific item." On p70, left column, "...excellent parchment could add to a scribeā€™s rolls to make a book." There are no rolls involved in crafting items (except for workshop exertion [which is so blatantly terrible no one in their right mind would do it] and experimenting on works of art for higher Aesthetic Quality), so these examples need to be clarified: either replace "rolls" with "totals", explicitly limit them to experiments/exertions, or just remove the particular examples in question.
  3. Given that a modest +3 bonus from Innovation requires, in most cases, generations of work and improvement to a single workshop (or willingness to work year-round and tank years of XP in a Miser reputation), I suspect that multiple superior/excellent tool bonii are not intended to stack. I would suggest adding an errata to the effect of "if you have multiple superior or excellent tool bonuses that could apply, use only the highest", to avoid "superior parchment + superior ink + superior red ink + superior blue ink + superior green ink + superior gilding" stacking until your average cathedral school teacher is suddenly capable of matching Homer or Virgil's writing prowess, given sufficiently expensive ingredients.
1 Like
244

That was a lot! Very useful, thank you.

245

There have been a couple of errata about historical facts, such as dates in sourcebooks. I'm afraid I'm not going to be incorporating them, because I cannot easily check whether the original authors, or the person offering errata, got it wrong. If they are mistakes, they will get treated as ways in which Mythic Europe is slightly different from Historical Europe.

2 Likes
246

AM p56, right column, description of "Potion of Creation" charged item:

If the man is not human (a faerie, for example), then the woman still conceives if a Stamina stress roll against an Ease Factor of 9 is made for her; such a child inherits some traits from his father.

I think this is supposed to be the (would-be) father's Stamina roll, given the "made for her" wording, but it is not quite clear and could stand to be made explicit.

~ ~ ~

AM p67, center column, description of Araquiel's Legacy (Minor Hermetic Virtue):

Any magus who possess this Virtue may used Creo, Corpus, and Herbam vis interchangeably.

Replace "Herbam" with "Terram".

~ ~ ~

AM p75: The chapter header for Chapter Six reads "Heron of Alexandria's" instead of "Heron of Alexandria's Legacy". This may be a PDF reader issue; if it matters, I'm using Foxit PDF Reader Version 11.0.0.49893.

~ ~ ~

AM p7-8 classifies breakthroughs as Minor, Major, and Hermetic, typically requiring 30, 45, and 60 Breakthrough Points respectively, and recommending that the exact number required be varied by the SG so the players don't know exactly how many are required. The Minor/Major/Hermetic classification is primary, and the exact number of points required is secondary.

However, the actual integrations discussed in their respective chapters are not consistently classified accordingly; in many cases an exact number of breakthrough points are specified and no Minor/Major/Hermetic distinction is made:

  • the Language of Adam requires no integration.
  • AM p31: Integrating Canaanite Necromancy grants the Minor Hermetic Virtue Canaanite Magic and requires 45 Breakthrough Points. It should probably be explicitly stated as a Major Breakthrough.
  • Defixio Magic correctly states its breakthroughs as Minor (Event Duration) and Hermetic (Unlimited Range).
  • AM p54: Integrating Fertility Magic has two breakthroughs; the first requires 15 BP and the second 35 BP. The first one (to unlock the Arcane Ability Fertility Lore) is clearly a special case and says so. The second one should probably be explicitly stated as a Minor Breakthrough as the closest match in difficulty, despite being slightly more demanding than standard, just like Spirit-Travel from Hyperborean Magic.
  • Grigori Magic correctly states its breakthroughs as Major and Hermetic.
  • AM p79: Heron's Legacy correctly states its breakthroughs as Major and Major-or-Minor-conditionally, though it does so in text boxes instead of body text, which is inconsistent with the formatting in every other chapter. The ability to create enchanted devices without vis is correctly stated as a Hermetic Breakthrough, but this one is in the body text. Notably, it's stated to require 60 BP.
  • Ptolemaic Coordinates do not require integration.
  • AM p119, integrating Hyperborean Magic: durations and spirit-travel are both explicitly Minor. The others are all 60 BP or higher and should probably be explicitly stated to be Hermetic Breakthroughs. Notably, vis-less enchantment is stated to require 65BP, which is both harder (more BP) and MUCH, MUCH worse (inflicting Warping on the creator rather than just costing silver) than the vis-less enchantment of Heron's Legacy. This may be intentional, however.
  • Hermetic Rune Magic correctly states its breakthrough as Major. It also claims to be "not as difficult as might be supposed" (AM p139). I have no idea what that sentence is supposed to mean; Rune Magic doesn't offer any bonuses to its integration (like the +1-3 from knowing the Hyperborean Language or the extra BP per season from having one of the Grigori Secrets as a Virtue or the availability of living practitioners who can assist in the lab like Canaanite Necromancy).
247

Multiple casting, ArM5, p.87:

You may cast a number of additional
copies of the spell equal to or less than your
Mastery Score.
Each spell must be rolled for separately. If
any of the spells fail outright, you lose the
fatigue and the spell fails, though others may
still take effect successfully. If you lose con-
sciousness, any spells that were successful still
run their course. If you lose consciousness and
accumulate additional fatigue loss, each addi-
tional Fatigue level causes an extra hour of
unconsciousness.

A few issues.

  1. It would be clearer if the second paragraph kept talking about "copies" instead of "spells". It's multiple copies of one spell!
  2. It should be clarified if the casting of the different copies happens simultaneously, or sequentially (if very quickly). This has consequences: in the latter case, casting becomes progressively more difficult as the magus becomes more fatigued, and impossible once unconscious (or in Twilight). The sentence "if you lose consciousness, any spells that were successful still run their course" seems to suggest the first interpretation. The sentence "If you lose consciousness and accumulate additional fatigue loss" seems to suggest the second, but it could equally be explained by e.g. the Enfeebled Flaw, or by casting a Ritual.
  3. Incidentally, should multiple casting of a Ritual be even possible? If so, it should probably be clarified that (if?) vis needs to be spent multiple times, and how the Te+Fo vis-handling limit applies.
  4. Along the same lines, either under multiple casting on the description of Life Boost (ArM5 p.44), it should be clarified whether the fatigue cost of the boost is spent per spell (i.e. once) or per copy when "multiple casting".
  5. Finally, perhaps a word or two should be spent on how to handle Concentration rolls for D:Conc spells when "multiple casting"!
2 Likes
248

In city and guild, craft quality, a superior item gives a +1 bonus at a craft quality of 12 to a specific task. An excellent quality item gives a bonus "For every 3 points that exceed the craft level add an additional +1 to a feature of the item. This bonus is then applied to every activity that the item is used for.".

  1. which craft level is being referred to here? if it is the base 6 for a normal item then to be a excellent item at 15 there is already a +3. If it is based on 15 then to exceed 15 by 3 for the same +1 bonus as an excellent item gets at 12 the item requires a total of 18.
  2. Also there is confusion between "a feature of the item" and "every activity the item is used for"
1 Like
249

typo

I've always understood it as, yes, requiring 18 for a +1 excellent item, as it applies to everything while a superior item only gets it to a single specific activity, accounting for the difference in difficulty.

250

That is still a massive difference jut to generalize a +1.
Also read literally that could give a +0 excellent item at 15 as an "improvement" on a +1 superior item at level 12.

251

I think you're right, and I think the simplest fix to is to add a note to that effect to the spell, and otherwise just leave things aloneā€¦

1 Like
252

That is the simplest fix. As long as you include that the spell cannot be used as a basis for designing related spells without a breakthrough (for each such spell). Otherwise its weird "target is not the target but the base from which the spell is constantly emitting from with new target every contact" could be used to design some really broken spells.

I guess we better start going through all the spells and picking out other "Legacy" spells which do not confirm to the current rules.

253

A&A p90, right column:

The character has completed a three-year program at a university to receive a baccalarius artium (Bachelor of Arts degree).

Should be baccalaureus with an E instead of an I.

254

The need for wards to penetrate MR should be made explicit it core. It surprises a lot of players when they find it HoH:S, and it still causes debates about Aegis, which is not a ward in the sense discussed in HoH:S.

I would suggest adding a sentence in the section on Wards page 114, similar to the similar way that it is addressed for magical senses before, to say that the ward must penetrate and that penetration needs to be recorded for later use.

I would also suggest to add a sentence to the description of Aegis, in the paragraph starting with Ā«Creatures with a Might score cannot enter the area protected by the Aegis unless they have a higher Might than the Aegisā€™s level.Ā» Or, if I am wrong about this, state that penetration is not necessary.

Apologies if this is a duplicate.