For our game, 5-8 days is not close enough to a month to be a month.
In our current game, my maga has gained 36 XP through book learner over 10 years of play (not including the affinity that gave an extra 12). I am pleased. I am sure she will gain more than 50 over the course of play.
As for her two affinities--through them she has together gained almost 200 xp (including at creation). This is more than good enough considering other 1point virtues.
I feel this is all quite fair.
If everyone at your table feels otherwise, that's fine for your game. However, I feel I tilt the system pretty hard--for our table, I think your approach tilts it too hard, pulling too many bonuses where there shouldn't be or where the tradeoff is too little.
Yeah, there's a qualitative difference between short-term study (just to get some information) and long-term study, where you actually "learn" something that sticks with you for life. Studying a map of Constantinople for a week doesn't give you "Area Lore: Constantinople 1". The reason that "memorizing" is different from "learning" is that you can forget what you memorized after time (as anyone who has crammed for a test can tell you later that school term, when the final comes around!) And that difference is Time Spent - "how much?" is another question, but a week (or two?) probably shouldn't do it.
Some "campaigns" perhaps, but no Sagas, definitely.
There are many, many areas of the rules like this*, that, I believe, are left open to interpretation specifically to allow different Troupes to adapt the rules as they see fit. Hell, maybe even that other part, too. (* whether you can study 3 books in a season for 1/3 the study total for each, not whether 1 day rounds up to 1 month!)
A StoryGuide needs to have a firm handle on the rules and the Saga, but also shouldn't feel they need to go running to a rulebook for every detail and interpretation. During CharGen you can fine tune your Character and put just a couple points into each of 2 or 3 Arts, so... why not a mechanic that allows for that in game play? (Otherwise, only larger bumps to Arts are possible, short of "interupted study time".)
By leaving some minor aspects open to Troupe/SG interpretation, the game becomes richer and more attractive for a wider audience. And that's a good thing, imo. 8)
All well and good and agreed, there are shades of grey of course. I just tend to react to elaborate arguments for practices which to my mind seem to justify the D&Dification of this system.
We have all had our munchkin moments, certainly, but there comes a point when one has to ask whether a player wants a balanced and capable story or one that must accelerate at lightspeed to keep pace with a sole character's lust for the highest scores and/or the accumulation of every mystery power mentioned in the books.
Once the floodgates of the latter option are opened all manner of elaborate justifications may be concocted to lend such uber magihood credibility. If that's what players want, fine for them but I would personally suggest they stick to D&D or perhaps Mage (where they can become the ultimate masters of time and space).
Lauding you once for a clever exploitation of a grey area is far from "usually Stimulating" munchkin practices on these forums, Sophia. More often than not here I have taken a dim view of the excesses many have put forward. Don't let my use of witticisms fool you into thinking I advocate the practice as a rule.
That said, I still do appreciate a clever idea if the justifications are viable according to the RAW (or one or more grey areas therein).
Please don't take it as an offence BoXer; I'm sure you play ArM for good fun and can appreciate many aspects of the game and it's roleplaying potential.
I was referring to many accounts where your brilliant ideas pop up a nice laugh on this forum, without suggesting that you use those ideas in your actual games.
Besides that: somebody suddenly started calling me Sophia and taking the suggestion that I am female: hmmm, all wrong unfortunately.
Paris Sophia scholae Bonisagi is my character -> that makes Sophia my parens and Paris my own name. He might be a bit queer in his latest movie 'Troy,' but definately male. (and I wouldn't want to be as arogant as to presume I am of the same level as my skilled parens )
Ah sorry Paris, thought you might be Sophia from Paris, my bad.
No offense taken. I am curious as to which ideas you are referring though. Don't recall offhand having contributed any particularly brilliant munchkin ideas to the forum, but my memory is for sh*t so feel free to enlighten me.
Maybe I'm confusing munchkining with powerplay on some ends and purely rediculous ideas in some other areas. But I'll try to find some nice quotes:
What would be REALLY useful would be... A bus, MAGIC bus!
Ive just had a new thought. How do you manage, with a starting character, to have both Diedne Magic and Major Magical Focus?
I'm all in favour of power play but handing the whole candy shop to a character from the start seems a bit much even for my megalomaniacal tastes.
Nothing spells fun like success.
I see it as spanning most every Art in some way but only as relates to defending against clear aggression (like building a wall against incoming arrows, or pulling an "Amergin" (mythic Celtic bard/druid) and calming a magically turbulent sea, or such.
I am wondering if you treat the source quality roll as counting for the entire amount of xp the magus earns in a season of study regardless of how many pawns he is using, or do you treat the roll+aura as a the quality for each pawn thus multiplying the total xp for the season by the number of pawns used?
Given that the idea of vacuums existed as far back as Plato (notwithstanding his rejection of the concept) one could argue that a Hermetic mind might well embrace and advance notions otherwise ridiculed or shunned (for philosophical or religious reasons) by contemporary mundane society.
One solution is simply enchant additional levels of penetration into any relevant "harm person" effects in the Talisman. At +2 levels Pen for every 1 level added to the effect, you could make quite a nasty magical killing machine if you have sufficient lab total to handle it.
That should be sufficient to take down many a dragon let alone a magus (and dare say even many an archmagus) if you arent all too bothered to be marched afterward
*waits for the flaming arrows to start raining down on him for his insolent munchkinism
That seems like a good way to resolve the issue. Could your magus survive 89 points of damage, or did I read that wrong??
Well, you've certainly contributed good things to this forum, I must say (I have indeed been reading quite a few of them). It's not as munchkining as I thought, it are usually bizarre reactions to other peoples ideas. ("She's the Lepers' Choice!")
So Cudoos to you and keep the good old light-hearted spirit that many on this forum have.
OMG, you must be a youngin' and have missed my witticism here entirely. To explain, the thread concerned a magic "easy bake oven" (yes, an Abe thread) so as a piece of wry humour, I simply posited a line from the famous 60's song. Hardly a legitimate suggestion
This was a question directed at a particular poster who had in fact put both Major Virtues into his/her character, not a question as to how I could do such a thing, silly Paris! (perhaps reading the discussions before pulling quotes out of context might be a wise idea)
Yes indeed, as I have stated I have no problem with power play so long as there are some discernible limits. Like all good RPG geeks I have an unshakable remnant of the long ago (game that shall not be mentioned)- player deep inside and love idea of eventually acquiring the candy shop of goodies available to magi. Difference is, the older one gets hopefully the more one appreciates the need to temper such gleeful lusts in favour of overall game balance. Not to say that as a mere human I dont have my moments .
Success doesn't necessarily have anything to do with munchkinsim or even powerplay, it is what it is.
This is the first real example of munchkinism you've quoted (bravo!) from me. However, considering that the intent of that thread whas to gain a community sense of what might be viable, and given that I did not use the given focus idea for my character in the end, the point is moot.
Not munchkinism or powerplay but a simple and honest question to the community based on a choice of wording in the Vis Study section which could lend itself to more than one interpretation.
A rather legitimate argument actually, again no munchkinism or powerplay intention contained therein, merely philosophical exploration.
A simple of statement of fact perfectly in line with the RAW on enchanted devices. Again a spurious citation for your contention .
vaguely remember this quotation but again strikes me a statement of fact and if I recall rightly, one that pertained to a concept posited by someone else here in order to gain community feedback.
My sarcasm must fly right over your head.
Another legitimate question put to a previous poster. Try again, Paris!
Thanks for the accolade and yes, I often find that a witticism offers a kinder way to demonstrate incredulity with some posts or posters.
)
