Alright then nice !
I'll probably dip into animalem to further the differences.
Also @Pralix
1/I'll probabaly take Flexible Formulaic Magic, so would you allow me to take variants of existing spells with different parameters ?
2/Is there a limit to the number of spell created by the character not in the books ?
Take flexible formulaic magic if you want to.
As for spells - roughly half, maybe? The number doesn't worry me much. There'll be lots of lab time, so sooner or later you'll come up with your own spells anyway.
So I had a couple ideas, very lightly sketched so far.
Idea One: Someone trying to found their very own mystery cult! Take affinity, and Independent Study, and practice for about a decade straight and start brewing up initiations.
Pros: Culty. Plus, I get to write the precepts of my own cult. Also ideal for spreading benefits to everyone.
Cons: Seriously, it would be like a decade of practice. Also experimenting with initiations can blow up in your face.
Idea Two: A researcher of longevity and warping trying to perfect a longevity ritual that actually keeps you young and doesn't inflict warping, or a substitute that has the same effect. Likely a quest doomed to failure, but that is not the point!
Pros: Always have a lab project. Also the spells that it would encourage development of would probably be useful. Encourages grabbing [strike]grad students[/strike] apprentices and making them run the actual experiments.
Cons: Doomed to failure, probably. Also warping from experimentation.
Idea Three: Merinita. You get to play with faeries. What's not to love? Cheerful and carefree.
Pro's Faeries!
Cons: Faeries!
I personally like the Cult idea, just because I haven't seen it done before.
The Aging research idea fits well with Arthur's character (and my own, simply from a Research standpoint) - but I personally don't care much for the Original Research RAW. (Ie, they're currently somewhat broken, in that there's some weird math that goes on when you experiment and push your limits.) If you wanted to research existing magics (such as the Unaging virtue) or alternate ways of dealing with Warp (holy magi, for example, don't die of it), it would probably work well - or at least better.
EDIT - and it looks like the newest character (Bastion) also has some variation of "working with death/dying/aging" thing going on. I'm personally fine with that, as it makes for a thematic chunk of stories to go together, but there may be some overlap, depending on how you design the character.
I'm neutral on the Faries one.
Oh, and if you're concerned about the Initiation script blowing up in your face - can you take "cautious with Cult Lore (my own cult)"? I honestly don't remember the Initiation Script rules.
idea 1: I've been wondering for years how that would work. I'd like it.
idea 2: we alreday have two players going in that direction (one has an aging focus, the other one wants to revive his dead wife). It would turn solitude in a covenant specialising in lr rituals.
idea 3: pro: it's a mystery cult, and I'd like to have one at least at the covenant. contra: fairies meddle and interrupt.
I like #1 best, but #2 or #3 would be fine as well.
If you want more mystery cult I can easily transform mine into a illusion based merenita, I refrained because glamour is often considered too strong.
I've taken a number of steps towards creating a starting covenant. This is not the democratic process which is so often used at the start of a game, because I'm too impatient for a democratic process. There is nothing to stop you from changing it later.
I could see two interpretations. There is a roll to check for validity, and it should at least help reduce botch dice there.
It could also help when rolling for on the experimentation table. I would assume it works the same way Cautious with Magic Theory would. The thing is a few of the potential results can be really nasty without any botch, assuming the guidelines are used. Not that great power should come cheaply.
I'm leaning towards the Cult idea as well.
your interpretation is okay for this saga.
roll for distractions for the 6 first seasons : success if >14
Hey - just read the Library rules. Question: are the Roots available in-game "for a modest fee from the Redcaps" (as per Covenants), or do we just try to get them as we would any other book?
Also - are any of the grogs/NPC's qualified to do the first season of Lab setup? (I believe it requires only a 3 in Magic Theory; the second season has to be done by the Magi, however.)
none
Sorry, the threads are all such a mess. I've seen other forum games have a way of dividing a game into topics and announcements, but I haven't figured out how to do that yet.
I think that having images included in the Characters: Quick reference kind of defeats the purpose of using only a few lines to describe the character. Forces us to scroll down quite a bit to reach other characters' descriptions.
Could we do without the images?
Sure, I'll remove it.
Season distraction roll for St. Avery: success if >8
Dang it. Ah, well.
Hm. Some thoughts about the seasonal activity idea (based on the fact that I just rolled for mine, and failed a season):
-
First of all - this is simply a critique, rather than a complaint. I do like the idea of abstracting out people's story and personality flaws in such a way that makes them have an impact over years that doesn't impact the main storyline. That, to me, is very interesting, and I'm glad to see that someone's taking a stab at it.
-
It objectively makes Hermetic, General, and Physical flaws 'better', in that they don't impact XP. For example - last night (before I rolled), I re-wrote my character to reduce my character's exposure from a Major Story flaw (-6% xp) to a minor (-2% xp) and a physical and a general (no change). I mean, I guess I can see the justification: personality and Story flaws tend to be more ephemeral, whereas the others have numbers behind them.
-
Usually when story flaws come up, there's an adventure - or when a personality flaw comes up, there's an opportunity for an interesting RP scene - from that, you gain the Roleplay/Adventure XP, usually at the cost of a penalty on the seasonal activity. Or, if the adventure was long enough, you just take adventure XP. (or if the seasonal activity was XP, you choose one or the other.)
-
It punishes working with other magi, as one of the pair might roll poorly and blow both magi's seasonal activity. (which is not something that normally happens in Ars). For example - had Arthur agreed to my offer of teaching ReVi, the roll I just did would have screwed over both our characters.
-
It encourages players to resolve their Story and Personality flaws - either by resolving them in adventure, or Creo Mentem-ing their personality flaws into oblivion - as they now have objective, well-defined negative impact on a magi's (and player's) career goals.
-
And from a gamist standpoint - it means I have to re-calculate what I was planning on doing. However, it's not an interesting choice (ie, I'm not given something alternate to work with) - instead, it's what I was doing before, only not as cool.
I think the issue I'm seeing is that Story and Personality Flaws, at least at a meta-level, exist to make for interesting stories and roleplaying opportunities, with the resultant XP goodness as an additional gamist element layering on top. Here, you've flipped it on its head, and made them XP and story inhibitors; in terms of this part of the game, the story we have is the one we're telling with our seasonal activities, which this mechanic does nothing but inhibit.
I'm still willing to work with this system - but it does seem to have some unforeseen behavioral consequences. I do like the idea of the roll, though as a way to abstract small-to-medium issues that don't directly affect the main storyline. To avoid those issues I address, we could alternately do the following - If a roll comes up, let the PC's decide what it's going to be:
- Minor - a few day's disruption; causes a slight distraction penalty to seasonal activity, but (if they choose to take it), 5 XP.
- Moderate - a few week's worth of disruption; a moderate penalty, but grants up to 10 xp.
- Major - takes several months; obliterates the seasonal activity, but grants 15 xp.
Other magi may choose (or not choose) to be involved - if they do, they take the penalties as well. Once they decide what it will be and who is involved, have the PC's write out a 1 paragraph summary, deciding what the interruption was (based on the various Personality and Story Flaws involved), and then decide what the consequences will be. This allows the Players to be interested in interruptions to lab activities, even if the PC's find them irritating. It also allows the players to help grow the covenant by having interesting things happen.
The benefit here is that it doesn't penalize characters for choosing to have a major story flaw over a minor one; it makes for more interesting choices; it lets the players actively choose the path their characters go down; and it matches up to the way Ars is normally played, but in abstract.
Essentially, the current setup is a Perdo effect - it's always worse. I'm recommending a Muto effect, instead.