Yeah yeah, I'm on it. Just gotta get these kids out of here so I can have parent/teacher conferences, then I'll go look.
1 Like
Since we have some Ex Misc development going on I wanted to share some of my perspective so you all can understand what I'm trying to zero in on, and why I think it is important, I'll amplify a bit. In the core I think many writeups for magical traditions lack in key aspects, and it really isn't about how much material they have written for them so much as where that material ends up focused. Because it is a criticism that I also have for many canon writeups for things, including even whole Houses. (No I'm not going there, just because I don't want to spend time there. Moving along.)
What makes different magical traditions actually different?
Some of it is captured in what kind of magic they do. But that isn't always a primary effect. It can be. But it can also be a side effect instead. What I'm trying to drill down to is what kind of actual philosophy or teachings they have. That can be partly shaped by the kind of magic they do, or the culture they are from, or their history. But that can be unpredictable and/or actually be causally working in reverse. Those things can be caused by something else that it is important to understand.
The thing I think is starkly missing from many tradition writeups is plainly put, what do they actually believe? What as Magi do they think about what they do? Why are they doing it? What do they think they are trying to do? What kind of ethos do they teach their apprentices and why?
It gets to the core of their identity as Magi, and resultingly should also be a significant influence on their magical choices/interests.
An example of how such concepts, without a whole lot of fanfare, can be transformative we can look at different conceptions of the Flambeau.
Flambeau Concept A: They are Ignem Masters who are Pyromaniacs. They like to burn things, and this includes people. If there is a fight in the Hermetic World you can/will find them there. From soldiers of fortune to mystical knights errant seeking honor and glory the Flambeau are magical warriors second to none.
Flambeau Concept B: They are descended from Roman Priests of Mithras, a Solar God of Virtue, Justice, Fire, and Light. Magi from this tradition emphasize the moral responsibility of being Magi and wielding what they see as the divinely ordained power of The Gift. They are frequently masters of their traditional Form of Ignem, and sometimes other battle magics. Perhaps just as importantly they often make both skilled and devoted Hoplites.
These can be, and often are, perceived as essentially the same group. Yet the overall tone of each is completely different and the Magi you would expect to see coming up in such groups would likewise be different.
1 Like
Have people given much consideration to Companion concepts? Are there any ideas that people have for Companions they would like? I'm contemplating concepts and would like input from the rest of you as to what kind of Companions you think your Mage would have.
I would like to see two Companions made by each of us to go well/primarily with a different player's Mage.
Vorsutus/Eadric I'm fairly open concerning Companion options, though I'd be particularly partial and interested in some type of mercenary captain.
I still have my faerie-style warrior using clesrada (sp?) mostly designed and would be happy to use him.
I'm entertaining the following ideas:
- A priest of some kind (maybe from Inchcleraun), perhaps with powers (I'm mostly looking at Banishing. This has some overlap with Nythin's magus, but I think they could complement each other under the right circumstances).
- A craftsman. Again my mind is taking me to a guy with Banishing, likely a blacksmith who makes the kind of divine bell described in TCI p.132 using Banishing + Lesser Craft Magic or the like. But I might force it to go elsewhere.
- I was thinking of a warrior type. A mercenary captain seems nice.
- An animal trainer of some kind (possibly dogs) with the Master of (Form) Creatures virtue.
There are other, less developed concepts. I have not settled for anything yet. The list is just so that people know what I am looking at and can make comments or present their own options. ^^
Also, I have not looked deeply at people's new magi yet, so after taking a look I may end up changing some concept to better suit our situation, or coming with something else entirely.
For Atheus, he would still need a bruiser for occasional protection and shady activities. Someone with Realm knowledge could help him expand his network towards the Magical/Faerie landscapes.
I think that would fit well. I have in mind an "honorable warrior wizard" kind of Flambeau (though not necessarily engaging in directly physical combat himself), so a "faerie knight" is fitting.
Likewise either of these for Vorsutus. Either of those could have originated easily from Lambaird/Lombard and have come from there during the founding of Inchmore, and thus have had long exposure to Vorsutus.
I could design a bruiser for offense/defense or a factor to help expand influence/agency, whichever you prefer. Do you have any preferences? A Goblin? A non-Gifted Hedgie? A no nonsense thief?
Any requests on your part @callen ?
I originally had a vis trading Redcap in mind for @RafaelB but given that @callen is the one with close ties, I'm unsure? Though in reality, bouncing between two mage's stories as appropriate feels fitting too.
Unsure about my second, so I think I'll wait and see what @Emelric ends up looking like.
On my end Blatant Gift means he really needs someone to either be immune to the Gift, or, you know, undead. Undead love him!
1 Like
The Redcap is a good option, indeed! I wasn't sure if you still wanted to keep him.
As for a proper companion for Domnall, maybe you just need someone who has known him for a long time?
By the way, what is our stance on:
- Magical creatures as companions/grogs?
- Magical creatures advancement?
- Familiars design (grog X companion, proper power level, should someone else play them, etc)?
- Familiars advancement?
1 Like
Yup yup! Gonna take a look at the drawing board as it were and figure out where I want to go with him, but still.
Also a possibility.
While I don't want to speak for @Vortigern I can say that I personally have zero problem with magical critters as companions/grogs. If I were a betting man, I'd say he doesn't either.
As for magical creature advancement, that's a discussion we should absolutely have! I mean there are rules for advancement and the like if I remember correctly, but I'll need to go brush up on things.
Again, personal opinion. A familiar's power level can and should depend on the mage. If you've got a mage capable of binding a dragon, and they put in the time and effort to do so, then why should we get in their way and say they can't? Rule of cool/say yes... but are almost always my guiding principles after all!
If I remember correctly, familiars get to ignore the standard might penalties for advancement, so yeah, they can and should advance like anyone else. In fact it's one of the major selling points of the bond for a familiar. That and immunity to Acclimation.
1 Like
I believe I would use the "High Powered" row in RoP:M to set the baseline Might Score at Companions: 15, Grogs: 5.
As stipulated in RoP:M. My only hesitancy is I don't like things that disincentivize adventuring/stories. But ... the nature of Magic Realm things is kind of reinforced by Acclimation etc. So ... as is I don't think I'd change anything.
Magic creatures require so much vis to advance and/or gain meaningful powers, and the costs increase as they do so, I think we rapidly reach a point where wizards decide that vis is better spent elsewhere. Or not ... and then that is a cost/reward decision for people to make regarding what is the best use of the resource and how much they are willing to pay for what. A decision with trade-offs and costs.
Familiars for this game will require stories in acquisition but ... because they are so intrinsic to being tied to the concept of their mage I think I'm comfortable with them being Companion tier and mostly designed by the Magus player with review/input/approval from the troupe. They don't "need" to be played by someone else but they can be and I'd prefer if they were.
Unpenalized Ability advancement. No penalties from Acclimation. (These are the benefits of being a Familiar.) Transformation is still possible but the costs are the same/unaffected.
You aren't wrong. 
I'd just say that a Companion tier Familiar is going to be much easier to get. You want a big honking dragon, and are able to bind one? Great. I fully concur that it is possible to go find and bond with one. But that is absolutely in the realm of story material to make it happen. I wouldn't restrict the Might that is possible to be designed/achieved in premise. But I wouldn't take going and achieving that as a foregone conclusion either. More Might equals bigger/more story(ies) to achieve, as a natural reward curve.
2 Likes
Precisely my point, glad to see we're on the same page. And hey, maybe you don't get the dragon to bind with you, but you get it to agree to give you an egg or something. Which creates a whole new set of stories, cause now you've got a very hungry baby dragon that you have to stop from eating the grogs. Or their cows. Or lighting everything on fire. Again. So in short, yes... but!
1 Like
As a general rule I think "yes... but!" makes for more interesting stories.
Well, they get to ignore the penalty for advancing Abilities, not for advancement in general. So they don't get a massive boost to Transformation.
A house rule I use to stop low-Might Familiars from being the best choice because of how they can quickly improve is saying that Magic beings must always maintain an at-creation Might score to have their Qualities, not counting Improved Might against the number of Qualities. That way, if you want your Might-1 Familiar to gain lots of Qualities, the Familiar will need to increase its might and will never really be as awesome a Familiar as that Might-40 Familiar someone spent a long time finding.
I'm not sure if I completely grasp the application of your proposed rule but the intent seems something I can appreciate and get behind if you can explain it a bit more?
Magus Awesome picks up a 50-Might dragon as a Familiar, spending a bunch of seasons doing so. Magus Bland picks up a 0-Might animal (which had Cunning) as a Familiar relatively quickly and can bind it soon. In the 10 years between the two bindings, let's say Bland's Familiar does not pick up MT so we can compare numbers quickly:
Bland's Familiar does the following: Practice Transformation for 3 seasons to gain Independent Study, with 2 points toward No Fatigue. Practice Transformation for 5 seasons to gain No Fatigue and 2 points toward Improved Characteristics. There are now 18 years available with 6 seasons apiece. Added to the remaining 2, that's 650 points toward Transformation. 40 points gets to Int +3, another 20 to Int +5. 10 points gets Puissant Magic Theory. 10 points gets Affinity to Magic Theory. That still leaves 580 points to apply. Each further point of Int costs 30 points. Or you could buy a ton of other interesting stuff. Basically, you've got 58 more points of Qualities to pick up.
So when Awesome binds his Familiar, Bland's Familiar is smarter, has an additional bonus to MT, will learn MT faster, and has more other Qualities on top of those compared to Awesome's Familiar. So Bland's Familiar will be tons better in the lab and comparable but weaker (due to lower Might) outside of the lab. With the extra seasons and ability to Transform, Bland's Familiar could spend the same seasons on Abilities as Awesome's Familiar, outgaining Awesome's Familiar, and on top of that pick up 1.2 Qualities a years, eventually overtaking Awesome's Familiar's capability pretty much everywhere except in providing Magic Resistance when the PM is down.
So I don't allow Bland's Familiar to pick all those up so easily. If you want another point of Quality, you better improve your Might by 1 first. So Bland's Familiar does that, but is now advancing more slowly due to Might 1. For the next Quality Bland's Familiar needs another point of Might, slowing things down even more. Pretty soon Transformation will stop without vis. Bland's Familiar will never catch up with Awesome's Familiar overall, probably just being a few points ahead in MT due to more seasons from the earlier binding, but being behind in Intelligence to balance that out.
I think the wording of this is what I most want clarified.
Does this mean a maximum number of Qualities equal to current Might Score?
I would also make it clear/explicit that I don't think the Familiar immunity to Acclimation problems/penalties should make it easier to pursue Transformation.
I do think more or less that any/all magical beings should be trying to achieve at least a certain minimal Might Score. No Magic Creature should be happy and content at Might Zero. Even if you have a baby Wurm or whatever that starts at Might 5 when it hatches ... it is going to be growing and wanting to grow. If you are trying to artificially keep it at a low Might it won't be happy, and will be hungry and looking for ways to grow whether you want it to or not.
Well, current Might score, adjusted for Inferiorities, and not counting Improved Might against it.