So take one mastery level in Pilum of Fire and The Wound that Weeps. That would give the Magus a boost at most of the damage dealing CrIg and PeCo spells (though the Corpus caster has other options).
On the other hand if you know the target Magus's name and can get some of their blood on a weapon you can easily generate a *4 penetration multiplier. I'm also guessing an arrow or thrown dagger would be an arcane connection to the user, explaining why magi are not hot on ranged weapons.
Exactly. Which is why Johnny One-Spells with just one TeFo-combination do not automatically win.
That said, with dual affinities, puissant arts and a focus, one can generate a frightening casting total - perhaps enough to punch through.
Still, just as I'd advice any magus PC to learn atleast 1 combat-ish spell, I'd strongly advice more experienced magi to have more, from different Art combinations.
You forgot Call to Slumber on your list though - and be warned that Mentem is rather versatile.
It seems PeCo is enough if the magus learns spells with different Range, Duration, and Target or invents a special way of harm.
This is not really possible with CrIg.
Sure it is. Start with a really non-standard damage value, such as +17 : that throws the 'same effect' out of the window. Then be sure to use some non standard parameters too. Sight range is less obvious than Voice range. Make it last three rounds (you'll have to pay Diameter, but that is covered by the rules). As a bonus, it's now on-going damage, so the effect is even less standard. And/or Part Target...
Here's an example:
Ah, But Did You Master This, Sodale ? (CrIg 27)
CrIg Range Eye, Duration Special, Target Part
The caster's gaze buries deep into the target's eyes, setting them aflame. The flames burn for three consecutive rounds, and cannot be extinguished during that time short of using magic, causing +17 damage each round. In addition, if they cause at least a couple of wounds, the person is blind until they heal, and has the 'Missing Eye' flaw if he has one wound remaining (or only suffered one).
CrIg Base 12, +1 Eye, +1 Diameter (the lowest duration that covers three rounds), +1 Part (houseruling that both eyes can count has one 'Part', particularly in conjunction with an Eye Target), total 27
(and, just for comparison, PeCo'ing a person blind at range: Eye is level 25 and heals as a Heavy Wound)
I'm not sure of that one. I could see some people saying this is the same effect with more power while others say its a different effect. Does "same effect" mean the same guideline, allowing for variations in power, or does it mean no change in power, either. For example, compare Aegis of the Hearth (ReVi20) and Aegis of the Hearth (ReVi25). Certainly they have different levels of power, but are they the "same effect"?
Chris
Basically, is the effect "cause +15 damage" or is it "create a fire at a target" - which was why I suggested multiple TeFo combinations.
The "+15" is just game mechanics, "create a fire at a target" is definitely the effect.
+17, +25 or +10, as long as it´s based on BIG FLAMES happening on target, exact numbers dont matter much.
I must respectfully disagree, quoting from AM5 p.101
"Two spells have the same effect is the rules description of the spell is the same, apart from the Range, Duration and Target. Closely related effects include such things as doing damage with CrIg, or turning a human being into a land animal."
I would argue that +15 is different, rules-wise, from +17, in that most important part of the spell, the exact damage taken. Thus the effects are closely related, not the same, and if the parameters also differ Magic Resistance will not apply to both spells.
So how would you answer my question about Aegis of the Hearth 20 vs. Aegis of the Hearth 25? You should find your own conclusion contradicts itself because the difference is exactly the same as the +15 vs. +17. In the case of Aegis of the Hearth and so many other spells (lots of wards, Demon's Eternal Oblivion, Wind of Mundane Silence, etc.), "the rules description of the spell is the same, apart from Range, Duration and Target." Thus, based on what is seen in ArM5, this sentence does not at all imply the +17 version of the +15 spell is not the same effect.
I'm not saying an SG would be wrong to label them different effects, as long as the SG also rules Aegis of the Hearth 20 vs. Aegis of the Hearth 25 to be different effects. But you haven't shown a reason an SG would be incorrect in any way to label them the same effect.
Chris
Would you give the bonus from pilum when learning Boaf? I would so I consider both effects as creating fire regardless of damage.
But which solution is better for the game?
If +15 and +20 damage are different effects than the mastery ability has no real importance. Is it good or bad?
It may be good if you want a saga with effective magi.
It may be bad if you want a saga when magi cannot easily harm each other.
That's a very technical arguement, in fact if you take that arguement to it's logical extension then even a comma out of place would mean that the rules description of the spell is not the same and thus not the same effect. Whilst it may be technically correct it doesn't feel satisfying to me.
I tend to work more with the description of the spell and it's design when considering if something has the same or a closely related effect. To use the examples thus far, in my opinion any spell that creates a bolt of fire and hurls it at a target is the same effect no matter how much (or little) damage it does.
Conversely a spell does exactly the same amount of damage but does it by causing the target to be sheathed in a cloak of flames is a closely related effect.
The way I have played it makes single level mastery of combat spells for the purposes of magic resistance almost useless because my "bad magi" tend to have varied attack spells. That said when an enterprising player researches the manner by which most victims have been dispatched and researches and masters a similiar spell I can reward it.
Yes, you get the bonus: they have the same Range/Duration/Target of Voice/Mom/Ind, and a closely related effect. That's good enough. Likewise, a variant PoF at Range Sight is similar to a standard PoF at Range Voice: exact same effect, different parameters. Or even a variant PoF with Range Sight, Duration Sun, and Target Room. But a PoF at Range Voice is not similar to a variant BoAF at range Sight: closely related effects, different parameters, not good enough.
Voice/Mom/Ind is still by far the most common set of parameters, so mastering a PoF is a good idea. To cover his bases a paranoid magus will add a Sight/Mom/Ind version (with a different damage level, so he covers even more ground). After that, well, he'll probably rely on the fact that other parameters are more difficult to cast or to use, and just be careful.
And I really think this is a better interpretation, otherwise two seasons of work (invent a low level CrIg spell, master it) will pretty much protect a magus against all CrIg fire spells 
I did already very specifically consider Adaptive Casting. It says "same spell at a different level." To me that says you can have the same description even with two different power levels. For example, Aegis of the Hearth 20 and Aegis of the Hearth 25 are the same spell at two different power levels. How would you define two spells being the same and not merely similar? I would say to be the same they have (or can have) the same description and the same Range/Target/Duration. Why my note about "can have"? Now, that doesn't mean everyone will write the same description every time. For example, when I write my Unraveling the Fabric of Vim, I insert the specific level and any Unraveling mastery into the note about the level it can affect. But clearly, as written in ArM5, the spell can be written the same way for multiple levels. Similarly, Pilum of Fire can be written "CrIgGen... doing level-5 damage..." Assign any level you want, the description will not change.
Chris
Hum was just rereading the combat rules. With a -1 wound a magus can't cast any spells that cost fatigue. That seems like a fairly large limitations, especially as it would take make most fast casts impossible. I suppose that makes mythic blood and diedne magic even more useful.
What page is that one on? I want to read it.
It's on page 179. But it's not worded well there, since the rules back on page 178 seem to supersede it:
So a wounded maga can cast spells that cost fatigue - it just requires a Recovery roll (and not even that if the wound was just received).
OK, first a clarification and second any easy bypass for many:
Clarification: This does not apply in the same combat in which the injury is received.
Bypass: Two ArM5 spells, Bind Wound and Endurance of the Berserkers, both get you past this issue quickly. Bind Wound is also fairly low level.
This does mean knowing Bind Wound can be quite handy. But the issues shouldn't be so bad overall.
Chris
Ehm, even your own quote says your wrong.
"Closely related effects include such things as doing damage with CrIg"
More importantly however, saying that having imperceptibly more/less, larger/smaller, more or less violent flames hit a target means they´re NOT the same effect? That goes beyond bad.
If the difference needed is so puny, well then how about i declare that my PoF shows as green flames with pink dots? For spell creation that is just a cosmetic difference, but if even an imperceptible change makes a difference, then an obvious one most certainly should as well. And so, i make resistance mastery 99% useless.
Now you say the effects ARE closely related? One is +15 and one is +30 damage.
You misunderstand him. He's saying if you change +15 to +17 you don't have the same effect, you have only a similar effect. For a similar spell you must have the same effect with any R/D/T or a similar effect with the same R/D/T. So if the +15 and +17 spells are the same effect, you can have different R/D/T. But if they're not the same, only similar, then you must have the same R/D/T to have a similar effect. Meanwhile, I, for example, have said both spells are just Level-5 damage, or something like that, and so are just different power levels of exactly the same spell.
I don't buy that my interpretation makes all CrIg similar. For example, Pilum of Fire launched at up to 10 targets (group version) is definitely different than a Fan of Flames that can hit 10 targets. The area versus individual shots means the spells, even though both CrIg and potentially having the same R/D/T are still only similar. Also, Cloak/Coat of Flame (forgot the exact name) is pretty different from a lot of the others via its use of Rego. You could also make intense sunlight, which is known to burn at the time, via CrIg. So there is still flexibility within CrIg. And even so, I figure the restricted flexibility is part of why you get +5 damage when compared to other Forms, so it's OK if it's a little easier to resist. Besides, if you're that good with Creo throw in some CrAu lightning, or if you're that good with Ignem thrown in some PeIg. After all, you still need to worry about things that can't be hurt at all by fire anyway.
Chris
Eh, i highlighted the "doing damage with CrIg" exactly because i was referring to the "both spells are just Level-5 damage" part...
Certainly not. Also, it might be convincing to claim that if the difference in damage is big enough, it´s no longer the same, like more than 10 or 10 or more or something....
Still, "applying fire on a target there", pretty much is same effect regardless of exact game mechanics damage number.
Having a burst of fire at this or that location(ie BoAF) can be said to be similar but not same, and other effects likewise.
Totally. Not same, not closely related.
+1.