I was wondering with the new Realms of Power Faerie book, why were the Realms (Somnaire, Antram, Bartarus, Atlantium, Ceilum & Tartarus), that you find with Arcadia left out of the book, as by the book it makes it seem that there is only the one Real within Arcadia??
As for me the Realms of Power Faerie needed to include them, seeing that some people would be new to Ars Magica and wouldn’t of known about them from 3rd & 4th Edition Ars Magica!
As for each of the 6 Realms of the Fae, you come across different Faeries unique to that Realm where they live!
Also I was disappointed that the Faerie Gods “Tauthe de Nannan†weren’t included in the new Faerie book, as I would of loved to see how 5th Edition approached them and what was written up (included) about them!
I know that there is a write up some where in one of the Ars Magica books describing the Tauthe de Nannan as just powerful Faeries, but I seem to think that they could be looked at as some of the Gods for the Faeries…
Also are there any web sites where you can find any material that was left out of the Realms of Power Faerie??
Well, as I seem to recall (serf's parma) the names of the different realms of Arcadia first came up in the 2nd edition version of "Faeries" and had been written out by the time Wizards of the Coast produced the 4th edition update, the rationale being that the names linked Arcadia too closely with particular cultures and mythologies. For the same reason the Tuatha de Dannan and the Sidhe were also made a lot less significant as they're basically Irish faeries and it doesn't make a lot of sense to have them turn up in the middle of Poland.
I thought the 4th Edition Faeries book also had the seperate Realms within Acadia (I'll have to admit, it has been a while since i have read the older Faeries books completely!).
I just would of liked to have seen the range of Faeries that you would of found within those 6 Faerie Realms, so that DM's could use them where ever their story was set!
Just because you maybe in Poland for instants, doesn't mean you couldn't come across a Tuatha de Dannan, as there are many story's that could be used to explain why one was there instead of where you would traditionally find them!
My feeling on this is that the new take on faeries, and the book itself, gives you the tools you need to style faeries according to your saga's needs.
If you feel you'd have liked to have seen more examples, or examples that fitted your own preferences, I can only offer sympathy. Well, that and a suggestion that you have a go at writing them up according to the new rules and send the results in to Sub Rosa.
Personally I would rather use legends specific to the area my saga was set in when creating faerie characters, than transplant them all from Ireland. The Tuatha de Dannan, Formorians, Milesians, Sidhe and Firbolgs are just too Celtic, specifically Gaelic, to be suitable for sagas set elsewhere, even in different parts of the British Isles where I think faeries should reflect Brythonic (i.e. Welsh), Norse, Anglo-Saxon, Pictish (pity we know so little about them) and maybe even a bit of Graeco-Roman mythology.
They are elementally based and so look very like equivalents now in the Magic Realm.
they are objective, not subjective and so break tone with the rest of the book.
I'd note that I'm not sure how you are getting one realm out of the tripartate structure of the Realms chapter.
See, objective realms, objective inhabitants. You have that in the Magic Realm. Faerie now differs from this.
They are courtly faeries. We didn't use Irish terms for generic creatures found across all of Europe. because we didn't want Celtic ideas to be nominal in the way they were in previous editions. The Irish no longer have it righter than everyone else.
No, see I think that takes millions of other possibilities and makes them canonically wrong: worse it makes them wrong by selecting the gods that well-known to British and American players, so they aren't novel or particularly illuminating of the new play options in the setting. If faeries need gods, then you have defined them as self-aware, in need of spiritual succor, mortal, having a code of morality, heirarchical, and basically magical humans. I think that's the wrong way to go, myself.
The closest thing to a faerie god described so far is whatever created the Master of Games, if his Tytalus background is true. Yes, he's only mentioned for two sentences. Lugh is, well, come on, he's a bit...well...dull. He's very, very human in his motivations, in what he demands from his followers, basically in everything. He's also a lot like Jesus, in certain key ways, so if you are going to make Lugh the Truth Behind Faerie, then basically I think that's just redoing a messiah again, and we already have at least one of those in setting, possibly more depending on your take on the Divine.
Thanks for the info on my questions Timothy Ferguson!!
Clears a few things up for me...
Looks like i will have to get the Realms of Power Magic for a good read!
I was only hanging for the Realms of Power Faerie book seeing a lot of our games settings are in Arcadia, so was looking forward to it...
If any Web Sites do get put up with extra information that didn't make it into the Realms of Power Faerie book that you hear about can you let us know please as i would love to see what else you call came up with for the book but couldn't fit in??
Well the obvious one is the Sub Rosa faerie column/thing that was mentioned here. I'm still getting these faeries together, so if you are a subscriber and didn;t suggest one to me, time to get your act together.
