Hermetic meta-history

Games Discussion Ars Magica
1

OK, not sure how to address the topic of history of the Order.

A good friend of mine (and a very long-term player, 2nd Ed.) has raised some interesting points about how 5th Ed. historical points have deviated from previous editions and in some cases completely ignored prior published work.

First, let me say that I completely recognize the business side in that AG owns the intellectual property that is Ars Magica with some elements used under lisence and then can do with it what they choose within the bounds of those contractual agreements.

Second, some changes were clearly desirable. Many people have stated that the Great Exorcism of House Tremere was needed and well done.

Finally, it seems clear (or at least looks a lot like) that editorial direction is marking a different path where changes as less obviously necessary. I cite the example of Flambeau as diplomat, here. My impression of him from reading borrowed books from previous editions was that he was not at all diplomatic. Not complaining, just noting the difference.

So, I'm imagining a scenario where Atlas has decided, ...
(a) for branding/marketing purposes to make some very distinct changes,
(b) to allow for more creative freedom amongst the current pool of authors and illustrators,
(c) minimizing liscensing costs,
(d) and wanting to build a larger, less ossified, setting.

I have no visibility into AG's inner sanctum and am only reading the tea leaves that have been presented. Further, true or not, the scenario is clearly in the purview of AG management -- as owners of the IP and the liscenses and this is not inteded as a challenge to that right.

The question I have for the forum is this: Given that changes have been made, for whatever reason, which ones do you like and which ones are you more comfortable with prior edition's material? Not talking about rules or mechanics, here. Simply the supposed history of the Ordo Hermae.

Best,

-K!

2

I've noticed much the same thing and I have to say, on the whole, I've agreed with the directions taken.

I think with each edition (and lord help me but with all the work these guys have put into the fifth edition I can't even imagine a sixth) there needs to be a little revision. Look at the difference between third and fifth. Stylistically they are poles apart. In terms of very obvious effort, research, and imagination they just don't compare. This is a very rich time and the line is becoming more and more sophisticated.

So why make changes? Why introduce Flambeau as a diplomat (you know, years ago I played a Flambeau diplomat for a very short time in a saga - I think it was only a couple of sessions for some reason...)? Because it's an interesting layer on top of the legend surrounding him that we knew from before.

One of my guilty pleasures is the Iberia tribunal book from way back so I thought I knew all about Flambeau. Of course, they can't just reprint that and they shouldn't just repackage those same ideas. These guys take what we know and just build on it. Flambeau himself remains a very powerful magus, skilled in fire magic, and with a grudge against Islamic sorcerers a mile wide. He's just a little more rounded this time.

I have noticed that the new Domus Magnus for the Flambeau is Castra Solis (I think) and not Val Negra. I'm not sure why the change occurred but I must admit a little grumble at that. I'm sure there will be reasons (it might have been placed in Normandy...).

But really there are a few things I'm looking forward to seeing (many years from now I'm sure). I'd love a new take on the Iberian and Roman tribunals. I'd dearly love a Diedne source book (written by me, of course) but I know David Chart's opinion on that one. I'm sure all of those kind of things will be very different. After all, look back at Pax Dei and Maleficium and you can see some concepts that have transferred into the new editions but other than that it really is all new. As it should be.

3

I agree, mostly.

There are plenty of reasons to change stuff (in game and for business reasons). I guess that I 'm trying to get a feel for the degree of change without spending the money on eBay and elsewhere to get old books just for that purpose.

Things that I really like so far:

House Tremere 2.0. I haven't dipped too deeply into it becuase the f2f saga that I'm playing has them as one of the big mysteries so instead of reading the section in TL in detail, I've just taken what's been presented here and in other venues. But I like everything that I've seen too far.

I'm a little ambivalent about the kinder, gentler, Flambeau the Founder. I read through the Iberia soucebook (borrowed) and found the story interesting, but he struck me as unreasoning and so, in my own mind anyway, I wiped the spittle off his chin so he was more civilized. The write-up in HoH:S didn't go quite where I went, and would have gone, so -- for personal taste reasons and none other -- the idea of him as a diplomat is very much de-emphasized.

Love the way that Ex Misc got treated. Forgot who said it first, but these folks are not all, or even mostly, dirt-eating, hovel-dwelling, Hermetic cripples (just 'differently-abled'). A magus from Ex Misc can be proud of their lineage, even if their non-House 'sodales' are dismissive, and can hold thier own. Wish I saw more of Pralix The General.

Bonisagus as smart has, I understand, always been part of the picture. But now he appears wiser, less niave, and somewhat tragic. The tragic part seems new to me, but I lack the background that other longer term players have.

Tytalus the leper seems entirely new. Gotta admit that I'm not sure how I feel about it.

Don't have enough background to comment on the rest of the history and the changes thereto. Any thoughts?

-K!

4

Just a short comment from me here.
IIRC Val Negra was not the Domus Magna in 4th either. Houses of Hermes had it moved to Doissetep.

5

I like the changes... or at least what I've seen from the changes, as I had very little information on the houses in 4th ed. Most of what I "knew" came from player stereotypes and insistance that "this is how the House is."

I like that the Houses are all broader and fully developed. It is easier to imagine many different character concepts for each House, which was a big complaint of mine from previous editions.

6

They've given Val-Negra the punt? That ... sucks. The Iberian saga I'm about to start has Val-Negra featuring prominently in its history. Ah well, it's not as if I've been forced to depart from canon before.

If Castra Solis is located in Normandy it will mean that four tribunals - Normandy, Rhine, Greater Alps and Rome - completely dominate the Order. Cad Gadu has no importance, leaving Coeris as the only significant domus magna outside the "big four" tribunals. I'm not sure that I'm keen on the political ramifications of this.

I think it has been stated somewhere that there are no plans to revisit the old tribunal books, but I also reckon it'd be a great idea to re-jig Iberia and Rome. Not only were the original books pretty poor to start with, they've gotten worse as the game has advanced (though if you want demons hiding under every rock, these are the books for you). And since both tribunals have already been covered it shouldn't upset the "no nailing down of chamberpots" faction if they were reprised.

7

I checked and it's actually in Provencal.

Those books fall into my "guilty pleasures" list. I hope one day that they will be revised but I don't expect them to be on an official "list of books wot we might publish soon". All the while there are new things to work with they need to take priority.

8

Val Negra was in Provencal anyway, in the old covenants book, although it had moved tribunals. I feel like it was tacked on as the Domus Magnus of Flambeau, and it was either useless as as play space or repetitious to use it the very distinctive way it was.

9

This, I feel comfortable explaining.

Val-Negra is in Winter, and the last time it was described (in 3rd Edition IIRC) it was in a regio that most people didn't even know how to find.

That means it's no good for hosting tournaments.

Doissetep is a trademark of White Wolf, Inc. and though Atlas has permission to use it, it really didn't fit the needs of the new Flambeau either.

So, I made a new Domus Magna. I chose to keep it in the Provencal Tribunal (the same Tribunal as Doissetep) to avoid upsetting the political balance in another Tribunal.

Regards,

-Andrew Gronosky
aka Sir Garlon the Evil Invisible Knight

10

Thanks. Always good to find out how and why decisions get made. An good insight into the kind of processes a writer has to go through.

I think it's also the kind of thing I was referring to above; that idea of taking a known concept and extrapolating. In this case, the Flambeau Domus Magnus being in Provencal was the core, not it being Val Negra, which had outlived its usefulness.