The consensus is obviously a consensus among the people who have posted in this thread - and as such the number of people posting would be irrelevant for if it is a consensus or not
Of course it does not mean one has achieved a consensus among all Ars Magica players in the world, but hopefully the opinions of the people posting here are representative of Ars Magica players in general.
I doubt it would be, since the group is hardly random, being instead self selected as those who chose to respond to this particular topic. Anyone already choosing a topic "mastery and relaxed rtuals" could be presumed to be predisposed towards a solution involving those elements.
For what it's worth, I would like to express my gratitude to David Chart for his enormous effort at clarifications-&-errata. I've never seen any other game get such loving care, particularly once the line is mature. It's something that improves an already great game, and something that neither Atlas nor David Chart owe us.
I would also commend David Chart's attitude in this effort. It's always been one of
a) respectful and patient inclusion of all people on the forum in the decision process and
b) restraint: clarify what is unclear if and only if it can be fruitfully made clearer, and errata only what is uncontroversially wrong.
I wish I could match his stubborn patience and politeness, but it's his restraint that I truly admire. Even if in a number of cases, such as this one, it has frustratingly led to solutions that are not "as good as they could be" from my point of view (and, I am certain, from his too), such a "light touch" is really the right approach to game maintenance; and yet few people in the industry manage it because it's very difficult.
14 Likes
I generally agree with everything in ezzelino's post above, with the exception that light touch errata is always the best; I think there's room for a game to benefit from a slightly more assertive approach from the perspective of adding clarity, making unpopular options more interesting, and generally making the rules more appealing to engage with. I feel a reasonable amount of the recent errata for Ars Magica falls into those categories.
1 Like
Reread that piece. It's clearly harsh.
The forum is not perfect. In another thread, I was critical of a situation where I considered who posted was more important than what was posted. It was a complex more emotional topic than this one, and I'd like to think while critical, I didn't suggest Atlas and/or David were not doing their best.
The forum is clearly a small microcosm of the players, but what other mechanism does David and Atlas have to use? Davis also said "general consensus", he didn't use words like unanimous.
It may well have been harsh but it also did not refer to David Chart- "They" is plural and refers to Atlas games, and the likely decision that a fiscally responsible company would make.
I concur with Ezzelino's overall thanks message to David Chart for doing his best to improve the game.
3 Likes
Thank you David Chart for asking the question on the forums. The care you have for the players always shows through. It is within your power as editor to just errata any discrepancies or interpretations in the rules but you asked first. So thank you.
As to the question, Mercurians and mastery in a relaxed situation should eliminate botch dice. Mercurians are made for rituals, so having mastery of rituals should be effectively automatic. This would strengthen a sometimes underrated major virtue.
Just my opinion. I think this errata would be clarifying, without rendering too many players ineffective.
2 Likes
I'm firmly NO. I think rituals should be allowed to be cast without the worry of botch dies, especially rituals that get cast a lot - like the Aegis. I also think Mastery provides protection for casting.
The idea of making Rituals function like advanced Formulaic Spells, so what Ezzelino suggests, also works for me. Rituals are basically Formulaic+ spells anyway so it makes sense they use the normal rules.
3 Likes