No, characters do not need to be balanced at character creation, usually aren't, and aren't intended to always be.
A mage character will nearly always be significantly more powerful than a companion character, who is usually better off than a grog character.
Even within the same class of characters there won't be balance - some abilities and virtues are just more useful than others.
Ars Magica as a game intentionally doesn't even try to get perfect balance between characters.
1 Like
They are balanced within class of power.
That's why you get "mage class" Mythic Companions, who are supposed to be balanced with magi.
I disagree. Abilities and Virtues do try to be as balanced as possible. They do not always succeed, but that's quite different. Otherwise, why have a point-buy system at all? It just makes no sense.
Not as balanced as possible. They are supposed to be roughly balanced, but no more than that.
If perfect balance was desired they wouldn't have changed from the finer gradation of virtues and flaws in earlier editions (where virtues and flaws could be worth anything between 1 and 6 points) to just having Minor and Major virtues.
No. Even 1-point increments do not allow for balance if you first design the effect, then price it and stop; in particular for 1 & 2 points V&Fs. It's still too coarse. The change came from the realization that that solution was neither necessary nor sufficient for balance; and that you could have balanced V&Fs even with just +1 and +3 costs (which were far simpler) just by fine-tuning their effects after the very-coarse-grained price was assigned.
Let us re-iterate here:
Game Balance is the White Hart of RPGs, in that it may be sought but cannot be caught because it is a myth.
Different groups have different styles, which makes the value of various trait have different values to different people. That Other Game solves this by essentially being a combat simulator. Please do drag us down there.
Don't get too hung up on perfect game balance. It's a trap.
2 Likes
I agree and disagree.
Perfect game balance may be unachievable, but the more game balance you achieve, the richer your game becomes, because more options become equally viable. It's a fallacy to say "perfect game balance is unachievable, so I just should not care about game balance".
It is. I was trying to be polite about you pursuing to hard, as far as I can tell 
1 Like
Hi,
It seems to me that along with some of the other rules clarifications being discussed, the rules for virtues such as Magister and doctor should be clarified, because the argument about how the experience points granted interact with age never ends.
My own preference is to have the virtues suggest an age but not require it. This leaves room for prodigies, and for rules that explicitly Grant extra experience points, which is what I think the rules should be. Of course, if the rules are not supposed to be that way, and there is a weird age interaction between a hermetic apprenticeship, years spent after childhood, and the age requirement of these virtues, something very explicit should be included so that everyone knows exactly how to use these virtues. New paragraph new paragraph
Anyway,
Ken