Lets design a Tribunal Fair

Games Discussion Ars Magica
81

The house of enchanters probably enchant fewer items than almost anybody else, because they put so much prestige into the greater devices that easily take years to enchant.

Not quite, maybe, because I do not really see the average magus enchanting dozens of trivial items either. That's work left for apprentices. But there have been quite a few apprentices over the years, and they should have created some.

At the end of the day I am looking for excuses to keep numbers down. If the PCs can suddenly by hundreds of cheap items at a fair, it means hundreds of items to track, and it means hundreds of powers whose impact is hard to predict. The story already suffers from unmanageable complexity.

82

Coulda sworn I told my son to wash that off!

83

While a agree that cheap items exist and there is a build up of them during the 5-6 centuries of Order existence, the same rule than for rituals applies: if it can be done through mundane means, why would a mage waste time and resources to do it by magic (even the cheapest of magical item cost a pawn) ?

Magic lights are useful, cheap, but really only needed: in close space where suffocation could be an issue or to reduce fire hazard (library). A dozen of magical candles still requires a dozen of pawns and at least a season of work - a Verditius would charge 12 pawns, plus twice the amount of vis he extract in a season (let's say 5, on the small side) so a total of 22 pawns for a dozen of candles... suddenly it is not so cheap.

Lamp without Flame, Base 4, D: Sun (+2), T: Ind, R: Self, 1 use a day (+0), without env. trigger to make it as cheap as possible, is still a level 10 enchantment. Assuming a labtext available, for a dozen to be done within a season, a mage would still need a lab total of 120... Nope. I don't see the Flambeau Archmage doing that. More reasonably, a labtot of 60, to make 6 candles a season, by a moderately specialised mage.

It is a good exercise for a apprentice as a first enchantment, but it still cost one pawn, whereas torches are cheap to manufacture, lamp oil requires... oil only. Candles requires a bit more skill to manufacture, but how many can you buy with the cost of one pawn - and at one stage the covenant will likely have it's source of light, whether it is oil or candle.

So yes, it is sexy to imagine a covenant with lights like Hogwarts, and some covenants will looks like that, but they are not the majority.

Finally, like most simulation done (for book level and quality existence, for mage's age, etc...) it depends on so many parameters that's the variance will always be very wide.

I would also easily imagine that with the exception of House Tremere organization of tracking magical resources systematically, most covenant would loose track of minor items given to grogs: where is stored the stone cutting knife used while building and expanding the covenant ? And the Glove of the Carpenter we used until we were able to hire a good mundane specialist ? Those items had their used, were looked after while they were needed, but slowly, after one decade of not being used might have been forgotten and are not missed by anybody. Then maybe a grog found it and trade it, possibly to somebody outside the Order.

The idea of cheap items trade is sound (and a good source of grog adventures), as covenants tied up for specialists or resources would look for such answers, but I would not see ten of thousands of items stored left and right amongst the Order.

2 Likes
84

As a flex. No one needs jewels or fancy clothes, and yet people went through great costs to get gold, silver, fancy shinny rocks just to show off. What need does cloth of gold fulfil that justifies the outrageous costs?

Regarding lights in particular, torches often smelled, would give a flickering light etc So for one who might spend 3 months studying a book getting a good light source is absolutely worth it.

3 Likes
85

Another thing that would help to keep the number of magical items down is that they are not invulnerable, and in particular, not immune to natural wear and tear. The enchantment may last forever, the item, not so much. I think it's fair to say most items do not actually live much beyond the lifespan of it's intended owner. This might be too much bookkeeping during a saga, but easily explains why the order is not overflowing with magical items.

This puts a small twist on the magical flea market: they are likely all damaged. Still functional, but one or two more botches while using the item will break them (using the rules on C&G p.77).

The magical swords are bent or chipped, the magical lamps are cracked after being dropped by careless grogs, the boots are falling apart after a particularly harsh travel, etc, etc.

86

Good ideas, but ... the popular rings and pendants would not suffer. Swords may break, lamps crack, and clothing wear down, but we would still expect to see magic jewelry centuries old.

And why make a magic lamp, when you can make a gold ring of light?

Sure, I overestimate the magi's concern for distant futures. Why go to extra lengths to add trivial trinkets to your legacy? But the long-lasting jewelry would still be there.

87

All you need to break a magical ring is to botch an Athletics roll and as a result fall down and crack the basket, the gemstone, or the shank. Or, upon botching a defense roll, have your hand bitten (maybe even eaten) by the ravenous wolf you are fighting against. Or botching your soak roll against the Flambeau's Pilum and having the ring melting, still on your finger.
A necklace might get caught on a tree branch while you pass by and burst. Or be damaged when a thief tries to steal it. Etc, etc.

There are narrative ways to justify any important item getting into trouble because you botched a roll, even if the item is not directly use for that action, being only exposed to it's results. That's the nature of botches, after all.

Going outside of damage, jewelry might also be lost, misplaced or stolen (and then destructed to avoid being recognized, sold as gemstones and metal). Which also decrease it's availability.

But yes, in general I'd say it's easier to find centuries old (used, but well mantained) magical jewelry than centuries old (used, but well mantained) magical swords/shields/armor.

2 Likes
88

The biggest adjustment factor is the schism war. How many magical items were destroyed as collateral damage when entire covenants were actively at war with each other and more or less ignoring the code about it? If you look at that as a reset button for all intents and purposes you are looking at much smaller numbers of produced items.
also it is worth pointing out that items which expire are intended as a required limit for selling items to mundanes, because apparently someone thought it would be a good idea to spend vis enchanting items to be traded for gold?

1 Like
89

At a 99% lost/destroyed rate, there is still most likely somewhere in the range of 50~100 enchanted items per Covenant (5,000~10,000 across the Order) that were produced by dead Magi. Even if the Schism War served as a total wipe of items produced by those killed before and during it, that would at most just half the numbers.

One thing that hasn't been mentioned in the back and forth is the Redcaps. They account for half of the Order population and are likely the holders of half (if not more) of the non-lost/destroyed enchanted items.

Again I am not saying that using realistic or semi-realistic numbers for enchanted items is the "proper" way to play. The game is complex enough that trying to track them all is just adding pain on top of pain. What it should allow is that if your players want something simple and common they should be able to fairly easily buy it already made rather than having to enchant it themselves or hire someone else to.

3 Likes
90

Sure, any given item could be destroyed in any number of ways, but we were talking about numbers of items surviving. Plausible narrative justifications rarely make good statistical explanations.

91

Any "good statistical explanation" has a bunch of assumptions. Reduce the assumptions about how many items magi make, and there's no longer a need for wholesale destruction.

2 Likes
92

I agree, and would add a follow-up question: even if it cannot be done (or at least not as satisfactorily) through mundane means, as long as it can be done by non-fatiguing spontaneous magic, why would a mage waste time and possibly resources to do it via an enchanted device?

93

Because the time of magi is valuable and is better spent on other things. A season and a couple of pawns of vis to ensure that you never have to do the rounds of lighting the rooms every evening, or "chop" the firewood, or fix a tool for a grog ever again may seem like a bargain to many magi.

94

Sure. But exactly because time is valuable most magi would rather spend a few hours on a one-time tour of the covenant to ensure every room has its D:Ring Lamp without flame rather spend a season to create enchanted devices generating magical illumination.

95

It would not be a one time thing (Rings can fail pretty easily) and there would be no cost savings from it without a HR.

96

I have to disagree. Rings do not fail pretty easily if you trace them where they are not in the way. So a magus would probably only need to tour the covenant once, over an afternoon, and probably spend a minute or two every year fixing the few broken Rings (or adding new ones to new rooms etc.) just when he's passing by.

As for cost savings why not? The X-savings-per-magnitude-of-enchanted-devices is just a rule of thumb. If non-ritual spells can do something that common sense says should save money, then it saves money.

2 Likes
97

In my experience, Magi usually make items if they need to. In one of the games am in, my character made an item to grant Magical Light to his Lab, but the other players declined his offer to make them copies, even though with his Lab Total, and the Lab Text, he can make two of them in one Season of work.

Neither of them wanted the +1 Imaginem bonus to their lab. Even though it would only cost two pawns each. My Magi didn't want to charge them more for the items.

Now, I don't see most Magi making over 10-20 items over their lifetime, unless you include charged items as well. Would there be more prolific makers? Sure. But there are a large number that would make less. Especially those who have Weak Enchanter. Those Magi would maybe make a Talisman, and that's about it. And even their Talismans are likely to not have many or very powerful effects.

98

This goes 2 ways.

Think of trivial things that take a small bit of time, that we spend money on to have a gadget do it for us. Automatic vacuum cleaners, Automatic pool cleaners, being able to play music by telling Siri to do it. The gadgets to make this happen generally cost hundreds of dollars. The amount of time spent to earn the money is significant.

If in the modern world, we accept people spend significant amount of time to save them a degree of effort, then it's fair to think people in the Mystic Europe era would do the same.

As a player it's easy to say, I cast divide by 5 sponts, so no roll, no warping chance, to light up the place. That's 10 seconds down. The character's experience is a bit different. All you need to do is imagine a magi muttering to himself. "This is so tedious, I know I'm the CrIg guy, so it has to be me, but this 20 minutes each night is beneath me. I'm going to make an enchantment so I don't have to do this tedious joke of a job."

4 Likes
99

Fun metaphysics there: There's an argument that creating light inside a D:Ring doesn't work because the light extends outside of the ring, thereby breaking it.

How easily rings are broken is actually a big change saga by saga.

Also, the big advantage of magical items, they can be handled by mundanes, or by future magi if the covenant's population changes. What happens when the guy who can non-fatigue a permanent light is in twilight for 7 years, and you have the choice of a) Recasting the 35 spontaneous fatiguing spells to relight the wing of the manor that went dark, or b) making the grogs upset for a few years and make htem use mundane tech they aren't used to. Obviously, (B) but that will have a loyalty loss.

Plus, your hermetic prestige will take a ding because people know you're a miser or a beggar for vis, with no magical lighting.

I like this point.

3 Likes
100

They are opposites for the player vs character. Spont is simple for the player but tedious for the character.

Also how many groups actually have someone who can non-fatiguing spont ring lights all over the place? That is CrIg 50+ (Base 3 torch, +1 Touch, +2 Ring) and gets to the 75+/100+ if you want actual good bright light. Maybe if the group has a traditionalist Flambeau they might have someone who hits the "torch" level but then you are assigning someone likely to be grumpy about it to handling your lights.