Other Games in Mythic Europe

Games Discussion Ars Magica
1

On the last page of Ars Magica 1st edition, we were told that Lion Rampant was developing "a line of games set in the Middle Ages and using the same basic rules found in Ars Magica". They mentioned games about knights, clergy, and rogues.

20230211_113415
20230211_1134151920×2560 355 KB

Obviously, it never happened. But David Chart mentioned "other games set in Mythic Europe" in another thread, and others have expressed the same sentiment elsewhere.

What would you like to see?

I would love to have just what they promised us in 1987. Particularly the one about knights. There's Pendragon for that, and there's some very good stuff in there (I especially like the virtue/passion system), but there are some oddities too, as well as the limitations of it being set only in the Arthurian period.

Or, just skip the step of creating three more individual games, each focusing on a particular class or profession, and go ahead to the "one large meta-game", in which players can choose which class they like best. Yes, I know: "Ars Magica rejects the assumption that..." but maybe it's time to move past that.

So then the question would be how to balance it so that magi aren't as overwhelmingly powerful as they are in ArM. I don't really think it would take that much. Develop the True Faith/Miracles into a fully working system for clerics: give them lists of sacraments, rites, prayers, litanies, devotions, etc., and increase the magic resistance granted by the Divine. Do that last bit for knights (and other men at arms) too, at least those who have True Faith and are in good standing. Finally, at last, come up with a really good, working combat system (I've actually got one of my own for my home games). For rogues, magical protection is more problematic, as they're not likely to be very holy. Perhaps give them access to a black market trade in amulets and talismans created by hedge wizards and fringe sorcerers, which actually work. Perhaps say that the Parma is not actually quite so unique as the members of the Order formerly arrogantly believed.

Then, begin to develop the chivalric world, the Church, and the world of thieves' guilds to the same extent that the Order has been. This would take a while, of course, but it would be fun. There's lots of material, of course, for chivalry and the Church. I'd start with Chivalry by Maurice Keen for knights. For rogues, there would have to be more making stuff up (like was done for magic), but Rinconete y Cortadillo by Cervantes would be a good place to start.

Other ideas?

3 Likes
2

That line of product is likely what became Mage, Werewolf and Vampire dark ages, skipping the knights and rogues (except in so far as vampires and ghouls (etc.) being knights and rogues).

4 Likes
3

Yeah, that's true: the "supernatural creatures" part got done, sort of.

4

That is plenty of high fantasy, but not so much of the low fantasy and authentic medieval. It would be nice to play the faeries and the hedge wizards of Mythic Europe without power actually to Transform Mythic Europe. One thing I love about Ars Magica is that it is not the good guys against the bad guys, but rather the good against the bad within each guy. That is what I would want to keep, and that means that we need the temptations of demons and corruption within the church and the nobility. Magic is cool, but we do not need the high-fantasy power spree. Faerie is cool both because it is part of the authentic myth and because of the ambiguous moral.

2 Likes
5

That moral spectrum would actually work well with both knights and clergy. There are good knights and bad ones; ones who live up to chivalry, and robber-knights who kidnap maidens. And it goes without saying that there are bad clerics. In addition to licentious, gluttonous, ambitious, greedy, dishonest ones, most of the practioners of necromancy (which had come to encompass black magic in general, not just summoning the dead) were priests. All that should be included, along with good-hearted rogues like Robin Hood. The only thing that depends on their actually being good and virtuous are the divine supernatural powers which come with True Faith.

There's an Arthurian story...can't remember which knight, I think Percival...in which he's stranded on an island and the devil appears to him in the form of a beautiful woman, with food, drink, rest, shade, a ship to escape on, etc. The temptations of the devil are already there, built in to the history and literature.

1 Like
6

Nah, that's a different moral spectrum, torn between temptation and salvation. The faeries have no soul, so human moral has no meaning.

7

I think there is room in the setting for low-power other games. If you treat Hermetic magic for what it is - the rare uber-powerful wizards, living in a far-away castle - for every other person in the setting, the game is basically low-magic and especially low Magic Resistance.

So, you could have a game about hedge-wizards playing around with amulets or what-not, set in a city or some noble's court. You could have a game about a noble who is plagued by faeries, which he struggles against by his wits and some Faerie Lore more than anything else. You can have a game about a weak Divine tradition desperately fighting against the horrors of the Infernal. And so on.

To make these games good, I think there are two key changes that need to be made to the game system:

(1) Better combat mini-game. The poor combat in Ars Magica is not an accident, it is because the game is focused on presenting the awesomeness of wizards against background NPCs. But lacking significant combat magic, the other games will need a combat system that allows for an interesting combat mini-game.

I think an Aspect system a la FATE could serve well here. That way the noble could use his environment and lore to outwit and escape the faeries, the exorcist could use his inner strength to overpower the demon's nightmares, and so on.

(2) Better hedge-magic mini-game. Hedge magic is all over the place, with many varied and unbalanced rule systems. Some, such as the Witches of Hedge Magic, are clearly designed to be playable as independent games. Others, such as the Sense Holiness and Unholiness virtue, are just single virtues. That's fine as far as it goes, but to really serve well as main characters (or their sidekicks), I think non-Hermetic traditions should be redesigned to better fit with the game's Magic Resistance rules (right now most can't affect the supernatural) and with gamability in mind. The independent traditions need not only be varied and thematically interesting, they should also be designed to be fun to play in a fight and/or their main theme's conflict, and have the flexibility and growth potential to facilitate long-term play. The side-kicks (single Virtues etc.) should likewise be designed with an eye for the application of their powers in actual combat and gameplay.

It might not be a bad idea to use Hermetic guidelines as a framework for non-Hermetic magic. Some traditions might actually use a stunted system of Hermetic magic, perhaps with only some Arts as Difficult Arts. While others will use their own guidelines, but with an eye towards the Hermetic spell levels and power, perhaps even explicitly. For example, "Curse" might be an Accelerated Ability invoking any Perdo spell with Range: Voice and Duration:Until, and allowing access to the special Target:Bloodline. This would enhance the game world's consistency while allowing the designers to make use of all the work that went to refining and balancing the Hermetic guidelines and system.

1 Like
8

I disagree. A seperate combat minigame will turn this hypothetical game of low powered hedge wizards into dungeons and dragons or a tactical combat minigame a la warhammer.

For a game like this (and in general) Ars magica really has all the combat system it needs in the skill system. I would ignore any rules that treat combat as being special or outside of the normal skill system, even the rules presented in chapter 11 of the core rulebook in favor of treating combat as a contested roll between the parties of the combat.

A combat system that is integrated with the system by which other actions are resolved sends a message that combat is simply one solution among many, and that each of these solutions are treated as being equal in the narrative.

In a game about low-powered characters trying to survive by their wits, such that one proposed in this thread, it is important that the game not have a complex combat system. Both because that is not what the game is about and because a complex combat system is a subconscious statement that this game is about combat, so including it will make players want to resolve problems by combat.

This is the also approach I use for playing normal Ars magica and it has a number of advantages, namely that it doesnt bog the game down the way a normal combat system does, but also because it treats action by other abilities as being equal to attacking. (e.g. running away, maneuvering for position, convincing a dog to attack your opponent etc).

8 Likes
9

Well, it really depends on the specific combat system. I suggested the Aspect system from FATE, which in that game is basically what you are suggesting: a general mechanic, used in combat just like outside it. The Aspect system is not a tactical system, but a story-based one; it puts mechanics around encouraging players to work as a team to win the combat by changing the situation, by piling on game Aspects such as the environment, character motives, and so on. I thought that could work well to facilitate the use of wit and lore and small magic tricks and so on to win the day.

The combat system should work to facilitate the gameplay of the game. In Ars Magica, combat is expected (lots of spells are combat-related...), although not as the sole area of conflict (lots of social/other spells, too). And it is generally the idea that magi will hide behind their shield grogs / magical defenses, and win the day by casting awesome magic. The combat mechanics hence are written to easily handle fairly-large groups of grogs, and corresponding groups of opponents or one big opponent, while allowing magi to unleash a spell each round to obliterate the enemies. That's why there is initiative, group combat rules, and all that jazz.

Other rules, such as armor and wound and weapon rules, are mostly there for verisimilitude. They kinda work, but they create a boring mini-game because to make combat into an interesting minigame for other characters is to renege on the main idea, of letting wizards unleash death from behind their shield grogs.

I am not a fan of leaving these rules and just using the basic opposed skill mechanics. If you don't have a reason to use a sword and armor, say, then this takes away from verisimilitude. If you do give it a mechanical advantage, then you're basically just re-creating the game's detailed rules. I like that there are rules in place to steer combat to be reasonable (an armored knight is more effective than a common solider, who is more effective than a common soldier that lost his sword, and so on).

I do think the combat rules can be tightened to make running groups, as a player or DM, even easier. And for combat between mundanes to be quicker and deadlier - I find it drags on far too long.

And I do think the rules for other games set in Mythic Europe should be set to facilitate their gameplay. In a game about knights fighting off dragons, perhaps a tactical combat mini-game is a good idea. In a game about the horrors of the Infernal, perhaps a system that puts heavy emphasis on sanity, willpower, Divine providence, and Infernal Lore might be required. And so on. That's another reason I suggested FATE - it's highly flexible, so it can accommodate different styles of "what's important" to win a conflict.

2 Likes
10

I agree with this to some extent. Especially when it is a low state duel between two characters, a simple roll off of relevant stat+skill+relevant bonus whould suffice (same as for certamen).

And with the later part of the post even more.

1 Like
11

I did not necessarily imply that it should all be about wits to survive in spite of low power. Dungeon crawl could well be a supported genre. One of the strengths worth preserving from Ars Magic is the broad focus with many genres encouraged.

There are other important features of the combat system which are important, other than simplicity. Looking at real history, combat should be important, but it is most important as a deterrent. Ars Magica does this fairly well. Firstly, combat is lethal; even the knight champion can have a bad day and even the victor may sustain fatal wounds. Secondly, the wound penalties are severe. Once wounded, your chances are diminished. Almost all creatures, whether by instinct or by reason, would tend to avoid combat if they can, and to surrender or flee if wounded.

I don't think Ars Magica combat is as bad as some claim. Improvements should first and foremost be geared towards special actions to take advantage of wits. Yes, seasoned SGs can improvise that, but I still find it hard to make good decisions on the spot.

4 Likes
12

I think this is overstating the situation a little bit - the non-Hermetic traditions will generally still have access to the Penetration ability, and with a reasonable score in that and an arcane connection (plus if possible sympathetic connections) you can affect up to a reasonable power level. Obviously this is significantly harder than just blasting through with your Arts scores, and a lot of hedge magi won't care enough to develop the necessary Penetration score, but it's not fundamentally undoable if it's something you choose to pay attention to,

2 Likes
13

It may work that way for you. I've only ever seen it turn people into power gaming little goblins, begging for every little advantage they could get.
I'd prefer to avoid any tainting touch of FATE if possible, thanks.

That said, I'd actually argue that Ars Magica's combat system is significantly better (as is), than any of those I've noticed mentioned above: D&D, Warhammer or FATE.
Your skill actually matters. I'll take Ars Magica's combat system over any of those hot messes any day of the week.

3 Likes
14

Outside or Ars Magica supplements themselves:
For a Knight oriented games I would definitively recommend "Love & War" of Atlas Games Penumbra Product Line by ... David Chart
For a Clergy oriented games I would find some inspiration from White Wolf's Dark Ages: Inquisition
For some rogue oriented games White Wolf's Order of Reason from the Mage: the Sorcerers Crusade may give you some ideas

2 Likes
15

Thank you, I'll take a look at those. I'm writing my own rules for in-house use, and hopefully those can give me some ideas.

16

I'll second that. Some years ago I had to give up most of my print RPG collection, and reduce it to a dozen or so books. This is one of those I kept. An excellent book.

1 Like
17

Pendragon is another great knight focused game, which more or less takes place in mythic Europe.

2 Likes
18

I would not says AMs combat is better than say D&D, yet, I would also not say D&D is better than AM. It depends what you are wanting to achieve.

D&D combat is great for a bunch of epic heroes or murder hobos slaughtering every bad thing they see. AM fails there. Sooner or later the one followed by a one kills a player. No degree of skill protects against an exploding die system. Rolemaster has the same issue.

AM is great for a gritty combat system, where if a peasant has a crossbow levelled at a knight, the knight is scared. 4 or 5 peasants, terrified. AM makes anyone wanting to do lots of combat regret it. A SG who puts together a balance combat is risking character death.

Important edit added in the above paragraph. I was going to say for the pedants out there, however, I know I'd make the same kind of jokes around player/character death.

2 Likes
19

It's not a bug, it's a feature.

Players never die in my games, though it is known to have happened between sessions.

An unlucky combat in D&D seems to mean that the party has to rest for one day. An unlucky combat in Ars Magica tends to mean that they are bedridden for a season. Yeah, sure, that would be a killer for the classic Odyssean, combat-heavy tale, but that's not what we want to play, is it?

A balanced combat in Ars Magica would often mean that one or more grogs are killed, or at least bedridden for a season or two, but magi needn't die, not if the defender rules are used. I admit, I think the defender rule is overpowered, but it is a brilliant idea which should be there in some form.

Dying grogs too is not an issue, but a roleplaying opportunity. I would not be too bothered about dying companions either, but I agree that magus death should be saved for a few milestone events in a long saga. That's why Ars Magica has an over-powered defender rule.

4 Likes
20

Yes, I've actually got two edtions of Pendragon sitting here with my Ars Magica stuff. I love how they handle Chivalry, the virtues and passions system is the best character trait system I know of, and the story-driven game mechanic is similar to AM. I've never thought their combat system was great, though, and as a minor, easily moddable gripe, I think it's kind of silly (and unnecessary) how they try to compact 500 years of technological development into a single lifetime.

Yeah, that's the issue. A game about knights and men at arms needs to be a lot more about combat than a game about wizards. As much about combat as the wizard game is about magic. And, as mentioned above, the system that makes it hard for the actual magi to die in combat is a story device, because let's face it, although there always needs to be a real danger in order to make the game interesting and exciting, a game in which your characters are constantly dying is not much fun either. That was the very early D&D ethos: let's roll up a bunch of mediocre characters (which we don't care all that much about), give them goofy, sarcastic names, send them into sadistically-designed death-traps, and see if we can get any of them through alive. AD&D classes only went up to level 14 or so because Gygax thought it so unlikely that a character would survive past that, that he didn't bother. New ones are just the opposite: ubersupermunchkinmen slaying impossible numbers of horrifying (but somehow not all that dangerous) monsters all day, every day.

What's needed is, like I said, something with a real danger of death, but a very good chance of survival for the main characters if the players don't do anything stupid. In a chivalry game, the ransom system helps a lot with that, something which Pendragon handles well. But what I will say for D&D, irrespective of its overall weaknesses, is that combat is FUN. And that element really needs to be part of the combat system too.

4 Likes