Hey, now that 5th edition is officially ending, and we have a definitive list of the covenants that have been written up under 5th edition rules and assumptions, is anyone interested in a fan project to take the old, pre-5th edition Tribunal books (as well as stuff said about other tribunals in 5th edition) and create new write-ups?
Yes, I'm interested in helping. I'm also pretty time poor but I'll chip away as I can.
I will do what I can...I really loved some parts of the old tribunal books.
I made extensive use of the Greater Alps Tribunal in the first season of HBO ARS MAGICA, so some of the magi in that book got rewritten for 5th edition rules.
You can find write-ups for Athena Alpina, Kentigern Ex Miscellanea, Balbina, and others here: sites.google.com/site/hboarsmag ... eater-alps
I would love to see that done. I feel like this is the one thing truly missing from ArM5. Having had a second child not long ago, I find myself with very little time to get things done, so I could promise to do more than provide some language information since I've already done most of that work.
As this is a fan project, every little bit helps. So thank you for the linguistic contributions.
Congrats on the growing family, by the way.
I'll just second this 
Well, as an adjunct hustling for a permanent, TT position, I'm a little strapped on time, too, but we're not working against any deadlines, so we could sort of work at our own pace, as a group.
It seems like one of the first things we need to do is have someone look at each of the pre-5th edition tribunal books and decide what information can be used, what needs to be changed, and what needs to be added to bring it up to the standard of the current tribunal books. For instance, 5th edition tribunal books all seem to have a chapter on the general (mundane) history and culture of the region, one on the mythic and Hermetic history, and then breakdowns of each region. Other key information that every book seems to include are lists of common names for the era/area and a timeline of some sort that makes some speculation about the near future. So assessing each book to see how it does and does not meet the rubric would be useful.
Does that sound good to everyone? I figure if we could have one person handle one tribunal book each, after an assessment, we could figure out what we need to do with the books in question.
Of course, firming up the rubric might be good, too.
Oh, and congrats on the growing families! Sorry, I really meant to include that. Oy.
I'll take a first pass at firming up the rubric, but, obviously, anyone else who would like to is welcome. In any case, one I have something, I'll post it for feedback. But, as an example and just at a first glance, it looks like Stonehenge and Levant could be used almost as-is, while stuff like Rome would need a lot of help.
There was a thread not too long ago about making a Roman Tribunal book.
If you'll forgive someone playing devil's advocate, group projects in the way you are constructing it are extremely prone to failure. None of the collaborators know each other except as anonymous forum names. There are few communication channels. There are many distractions. Things fall apart and the center cannot hold.
You can develop a rubric and go through all the books to figure out what you think ought to be changed, but ultimately it's going to come down to whoever wants to work on X book. If, for example, you decide that Blackthorne covenant in Stonehenge needs to be completely rewritten as, say, a Tytalus covenant (because we don't have Evil House Tremere anymore), well, that's all well and good. But if I decide I'm going to rewrite Blackthorne, by the time I do that you may not have logged in here for months, and even if you are still here, I'm probably going to do it how I want to do it, and I'm going to change the things I want to change, not the things you decided need to be changed, not because I'm being a dick but because I'm the one doing the work and the only reward is the pleasure of creative work.
All of this sounds extremely critical, but that is not my intention. Rather, I urge you to simply start rewriting things. If you see something you want to update for 5th edition, just do it. Start writing. If you amass a large and impressive body of work, it will get noticed and others may follow. You can't count on the group working, but if you work as if you were doing the job by yourself, you stack the odds as high as possible that others will help you.
1 Like
If you develop this project on a wiki, I think you will get more contributors and more casual contributors, and the sky's the limit on the breadth and quality you can achieve. For what it's worth, I've created a space over at Project: Redcap for you to do this work. Please see redcap.org/page/Roman_Tribun ... ty_Project.
I've also created a category, "Roman Tribunal Community Project," you can use to tag additional pages you create for this project.
My suggestion would be to start writing some text sooner rather than later. A few good paragraphs, made available today, may inspire others to join the project; whereas if you work in privacy and don't release anything until you're done, no one benefits until you're done.
Good luck!
(If you prefer to develop this project the old-fashioned way, as a downloadable PDF, then I think you have greater risk of not getting it complete, but that's your choice. It's easy to delete the wiki page I created if you don't need it.)
Well, anyone can use any of my Genoa/ Corsica and Sardinia material from my somewhat quiescent blog, My Life as a Grog if they want for inspiration, as I'm unlikely to be updating anything for a while sadly...
There was virtually nothing detailed on those areas in the ArM3 Tribunal Book, although I do make some references to ArM5 relevant material.
Best of luck!
I don't think so. Although the "vulgar" background of "Heirs to Merlin" (the Stonehenge tribunal's 4th edition supplement) could remain unchanged, the Hermetic stuff must be radically changed.
In the 4th edition the saga begins in 1210 with a cold conflict among Blackthorn (an "evil" Tremere covenant) and Cad Gadu (House Ex Miscellanea domus magna) for the supremacy of Stonehenge, letting the tribunal in a relatively sclerotic situation.
In the 5th edition, regarding an insert in "Houses of Hermes: True Lineages" (page 115, "Coeris") and as Doctorcomics says, Backthorn no longer seems to be an antagonist for the players covenant and need to be completely rewritten. And if you rewrite Backthorn, you need to rewrite all the hermetic politics of Stonehenge tribunal.
Furthermore, as written in "Houses of Hermes: Societates" page 101, Cad Gadu and House Ex-miscelanea are no longer ruled by the old prima Imamola. The House elected the young Ebroin to be Primus and he completely changed the politics of his house. Consequently, does Cad Gadu remain the first covenant of Stonehenge Tribunal ? Or Blackthorn took the place ? Where (and when) will sit the next Tribunal of Stonehenge ?
There are some other change in the tribunal's history lying in the "Traitor's Game" chapter of "Thrice told Tales" about the conflict between Pralix and Damhan-Allaidh in the ancient times of Stonehenge tribunal.
I've been saying this for years, but for some reason, mr Chart never did seem to agree with me
I myself have already adapted Iberia. Not so much as a rewrite but rather an update (from 1197 to 1220, then beyond as my game progresses). Material can be found in the Light of Andorra forum and our associated wiki. But much more exists as notes on my laptop.
Not sure if it suits your project though, as I didn't really care about maintaining ArM5 continuity. Case in point, in my version the classic Flambeau aka Reculed Seneca tale still stands as truth. I worked to adapt ArM5 to that rather than the other way around.
But mechanically, I updated characters and moved history along. Especially Barcelona. I use that city and covenant a lot.
The problem with me is that I will not bend my vision. You can adapt what I have done and posted online as you will. But I don't think I am what you seek in a team project.
That's the approach I'd take for Stonehenge as well. I like the approach in "Heirs to Merlin" very much, the material in the HoH book not so much.