We use Parma x 10 (instead of Parma x 5) against Hermetic magic. The rationale being that one thus compares (Te + Fo + Focus) to (Parma x 5 + Parma x 5 + Fo), so it should be more balanced. The in-game justification being that Parma, being Hermetic, works better against Hermetic magic.
The result is still very flaky, as there is a lot of variability in penetration and MR for magi. It did allow one PC to focus on Parma and offer a very good MR against even powerful Hermetic opponents, which was neat.
I tried linking magi's MR to XP in Arts, as suggested above, but couldn't get the maths to work well. Thematically I think this works best, as experienced magi will have more MR with considerably less variability.
Spells that get around MR are still a huge problem. I thought about MR reducing the effectiveness of all natural phenomena, magical or mundane, instead of blocking magic. Have damage reduced by -MR, from any source. And have spell damage be roughly Magnitude, whether directly or indirectly. The result is that a fire wizard gets to ignore a pilum of flame whether it is summoned by magic or belched from a volcano (which I think is good). But also that magi become super-man like resilient "superheroes". Which is bad. I abandoned the idea.
We also use MR = Might x 3. But that's another story.
And I also like Arts as Abilities, but ain't using it currently. And have been told it makes Magic Theory way too powerful.
Well, Magic Theory doesn't apply to spellcasting, so while it would be relatively powerful with respect to learning and inventing spells, it's worthless for actually casting them. I don't see this as bad; Magic Theory scores will in general be lower because Arts would eat up a larger portion of player XP, and players with low Arts and high Magic Theory can still learn spells in the 10-15 range.
Ratcheting back Arts to Abilities also makes Puissant Ability and high stats more valuable too.
High Magic Theory means high vis use, which means easier longevity rituals, which means an older Order. When it's suddenly easier to have older magi, your whole power curve goes up.
That's true, but I don't see how paying for Arts as if they were Abilities (i.e. Difficult Arts) suddenly makes Magic Theory higher, unless the thinking is that magi will concentrate on Magic Theory more. Lower arts scores means poorer longevity rituals, which means magi die younger. Magic Theory alone can't compensate for the difference.
And the vis limit needs to go, or at least change, given how it's the single biggest limit on creativity in Ars Magica. Want to make a magic sword with more than one power? Magic Theory 8 or get lost! The vis limit doesn't make magi more powerful, it just prevents the creation of certain greater devices. So you can't make a magic sword, you make a magic dagger with nearly the same powers. The Magic Theory limit on Shape and Material is actually a lot more relevant in terms of power constraint, and then it's only really important for lesser devices.
We could stand to get rid of the difference between greater and lesser devices entirely. One idea would be to allow any number of seasons to invest a power, but each season you take requires a number of pawns equal to the final effect level divided by 10. So if you're putting a level 30 power into a device and have a lab total of 45, it will take 6 pawns of vis, but a lab total of 60 lets you do it with 3 pawns. The number of pawns an item can hold remains the same.
Lower casting totals means more enchanted devices. Lab Total = MT + (1 of 5) Te + (1 of 10) Fo... makes MT best.
Dying young means inheriting parens' talisman, another enchanted device.
Personally, I love the current balance. There is nothing more frustrating in a RpG when you see some spells or magical items that there is no way you can ever dream of inventing/making.
5th ed allows dedicated magi to invent very high level spell (>60), however I will keep John's idea for a time when magic is fading away.
That being said, I know it is impossible to prevent munchkin to min max so I believe trying to prevent somebody to make Niger's perfect killer is a moot point.
My take on such PC & player (short of telling them "not in my game") would be to point how useless would be their skills since they will rarely confront hermetic magus.
Finally, it is true that the focus virtue will lead to very high casting total and penetration. Maybe, instead of doubling the weakest Arts, it could be an Art on its own (or an accelerated Ability). In the previous editions, the affinty was usually becoming a +4-6 bonus since it was handle like an ability (hence not worth bringing it to higher level), basically a slightly improve version of Puissant. Not enough bang for your bucks. But having it like an accelerated Ability could be a nice middle ground.
To improve it, obviously there would be no Summae, but either virtus or appropriate Tractatus would work. Maybe when studying a related Art, some XP could be allocated to the Affinity.
Dying young means fewer seasons to make magic items too, and being able to use someone's talisman isn't guaranteed - though at least you're more likely to inherit them than see them vanishing into Twilight.
I guess what I'd like to see is greater resistance without the involvement of the Forms, it's achievable by making Parma a bit more powerful.
If you make Parma advance as an Art, and allow only practice or adventure experience to improve it, it will improve relatively quickly, getting to a score of 5 is pretty easy and achievable within the year following gauntlet (two seasons of adventure or practice, assuming 5xp for practicing Parma). This will provide a new magus with an MR base of 20, and in the forms that they have a score of 0, they are in pretty good shape.
I've seen the L5Q15 books for Parma, and while it isn't possible to get to Parma Magica 5 in a year with the book, it is possible to do it in 5 total seasons. I will grant that my playing experience is shaping my desire here, my characters rarely have the time to advance Parma to 5, unless we have books of really high quality, such as the L5Q15 book.
The problem with a higher parma, is that it'll make Hermetic Mages even more superior to hedge magi or supernatural beasties
I had a similar, albeit different, idea.
Have form bonus apply as soak against all damage from that form. This makes magi difficult to kill, albeit not invincible. You can lower this to (score/2), if you want.
Add to that Parma*5 as soak against magical damage (defined just as it is now).
Moreso, non-damage spells are resisted, just like Amazon spells and some spells from previous editions.
Base EF is 6, +3 per additionnal magnitude put into this. Mind control is resisted with stamina, as is PeCo. Rego movement/teleport spells are resisted with Size. Add your Parma and form bonus (as now) to your chance to resist.
The Penetration ability*5 substracts to your opponent's magical soak (minimum 0)
The penetration ability susbstracts to your opponent magical bonuses to resist (minimum 0)
Penetration multipliers add to penetration skill instead.
So, taking back Philippus Nigger, he'd have a base +40 soak against Ignem damage spells (lowered by 5*penetration ability of his opponent). Against mundane sword blows, he'd have + 07 to Soak. He'd resist mundane fires with a +05 bonus to soak (compared to a +35 for an elder Ignem mage).
If someone tries to mindcontrol him, he rolls against a base EF of 6, with a +10 bonus to resist (- penetration ability)
If someone tries to teleport him away, he resists against a 6, with a +11 bonus (- penetration ability).
I agree. But I'd add that I want Parma to protect against other magi; this isn't a given based on the Founders, since they weren't fully Hermetic.
Focusing on Parma vs. magi only, I think I want basically two things:
A) A starting specialist should be able to pierce the MR or a starting generalist with his high penetration (and hence lower-level) attack spells, but not his low penetration (high-level) spell.
B) An elder specialist should not be able to pierce the defense of an elder Parma specialist without great effort (raw vis, sympathetic connections).
Finding a simple system that performs well for both points isn't simple. The penetration of the Flambeau template is ~15 ( 6 die + 9 bonus) with BoAF and 30 with PoF. This suggests Parma x 15 + Form as the MR. An elder version might have a PoF penetration of 117 (40 Cr+ 40 Ig + 40 focus + 5 penetration ability + 1 specialization + 5 penetration specialization +6 die -20 spell level). An elder Parma specialist might have (Parma 12 + 1 specialization + 2 puissant) and all Forms at 10, for RAW MR 70. With Parma x 15 + Form this elder parma specialist would have MR 235 (!). This is a 118 point difference, which can be overcome by 59 pawns of raw vis or 23 (!) points of penetration multiplication through arcane and sympathetic connections. I think this MR is too much. With Parma x 10 the elder parma specialist has MR 160, which is 43 points above the elder specialist's penetration. This can be overcome with 22 paws of raw vis or 9 penetration multipliers, which is more reasonable. Thus - I suggest Parma x 10 + Form as a more-or-less reasonable formula. It won't always work, but it sort of does, mostly, sometimes.
It seems to me that RAW Parma, with its "x5 multiplier", achieves roughly what you want in both cases. It's just that you are assuming very little xp gets put into Parma - which (only) makes sense if you don't expect Hermetic confrontations.
For the "extreme" specialist (who is arguably beyond what we see in our sagas and what canon suggests) a score of 40 in both Creo and Ignem "costs" 1640xp. A Parma specialist who put the same amount of experience into Parma would get a score of 25(3), i.e. a magic resistance of 125. This is just above the penetration in your example, even disregarding the Form bonus (and the Parma specialization). Note that the parma specialist needs no Magical Focus, that if Affinities come into play he gets the same "discount" as the Te+Fo specialist for 1 Virtue rather than 2, and that he gets a slightly higher "discount" than the Te+Fo specialist if he gets Puissant Parma vs. Puissant Tech + Puissant Form (and again, it's 1 Virtue against 2).
Similarly, I'm not sure the "starting magus" analysis you make is completely fair. The Flambeau you are looking at has Affinity with Ignem, Affinity with Creo, Puissant Ignem, and a Major Magical Focus in Flames (6 Virtue Points, one of which comes with the House), and has 156xp (i.e. 104xp "before the Affinities") between Creo and Ignem. Shouldn't he manage to penetrate (even with his BoAF) a Parma into which a starting magus has put 5 meager xp, with no applicable virtues whatsoever? The problem is that most starting magi begin with a tiny amount of xp in Parma compared to what they put in their Arts. But give a starting magus 50xp to spend in Parma (that's a single Minor Virtue pick, such as Arcane Lore or Skilled Parens) and he can easily hold at bay the Flambeau's BoaF.
In relation to my post above, I think that in most games I've seen Parma tends to receive far fewer xp than it "should", so characters' Magic Resistance appears low to an external watcher. I think the fundamental reason for this is that Parma is a static defense that just prevents stuff from happening.
Thus, on the one hand Parma gives players less "fun" than raising their Arts, inventing spells, initiating Mysteries etc. because it does not allow them to do new "stuff" - discouraging players from investing in it. At the same time, a SG rarely builds antagonists without looking at PC abilities, and typically (not that it's a good thing, but it happens a lot) if he wants those antagonists to penetrate or circumvent the PC Parmas he'll tweak the antagonists or the circumstances to make it possible - so in some sense xps spent by a player on his character's Parma are "wasted", because whether Parma is high "enough" depends solely on story considerations rather than on its absolute value.
The only exception to this "spending xp on Parma is a waste" is a saga arc explicitly about raising Parma, e.g. to face an antagonist whose penetration has been set just above the current Magic Resistance of the PCs. In this case, xps spent on Parma before the story are still a waste (in fact, a hindrance to player and SG alike!), but those spent during the saga arc obviously are not (being central to the saga arc).
EDIT: Of course, this should be taken with a grain of salt. An archmagus hoplite with Creo 40, Ignem 40 and Parma 1 is an eyesore that simply invites the SG to challenge him about that obvious flaw. But make that parma a 10, and it looks perfectly "normal", even though the xps spent on the Parma are less than one sixth of those spent on the Tech+Form.
I think you're stating what I've generally felt, ezzelino. Perhaps it's not entirely an issue of trying to fix the score as I suggested, but to make it a bit more dynamic in play.
Perhaps the challenge is to make Parma a bit more dynamic than it is in the game. I know Ovarwa mentioned fast casting and Parma before, but it wasn't clear how it was to be used. But the gist of it was to make it defensive, as I think the RAW intends, but doesn't make explicit. What if we used the Parma score in determining the final level of effect somehow, say adding it to the final level of the spell? For example, A magus can, with his Arts, or known spell mastered for fast casting, manage a 15th level effect against an incoming Ball of Abysmal Flame. A 15th level spell isn't enough, but the magus defending has a Parma score of 5, and would push the final effect level to 20th level. The idea being that he takes just enough "english" off the incoming spell that allows his Parma to handle the rest of incoming magic. And maybe also adjust the casting speed for determining defense to Quickness+Parma rather than Quickness+Finesse, which represents how quickly you can bring your "shields" up, or harden them, or something.
Allowing parma to offer x10 protection, or x15 or even x500 if you concentrate in your defence (your action for the turn) goes a long way to make it more powerful as well with a minimal "dynamic change". Just thought about it, and I am liking the idea. Now we only need to drop the massive penetration f hermetics to make supernatural critters worthy opponents instead of just random shooting targets and we should be ready to go.
No, we needn't ! Because that's a lot of change. Instead, increase the MR of critters against Hermetic magic, to 3 x Might. The most powerful manifestations of the supernatural on Earth (Might 50) then have MR 150, which is respectable enough I think. The weakly Might 5 becomes MR 15, which is low enough to be meaningful while being easily overcome by any dedicated magus - which is just about perfect for Might 5 in my book. So it roughly works, I think.
And keep MR = 1 x Might against non-Hermetic magic. The standard, Char + Ability roll anyway. Because there is no way these guys are affecting anything with MR = 3 x Might.
Down with uniform MR, I say! Tailor MR to fit the magical tradition, to match how powerful that tradition should be when facing creatures of Might.
Hmm. How about using Parma as an Art for defensive casting? So you attack a magic with (die + Sta + Te + Fo), and he defends with (die + Sta + Te + Fo + Parma). With Parma increasing like an Art. The attacker will generally have lots of other bonuses, including often a Magical Focus that will be balanced by the Parma but also further bonuses and he gets to choose the Form so the attack still has a slight advantage - but it arguably won't be a huge advantage, not without raw vis and such. And we can allow Parma defensive magic to pile on bonuses too, including raw vis, familiar bond scores, and whatnot.
Edit for another option: defend with (die + Sta + Te + Fo), but allow Parma (as Art) to replace Fo. So the attacker always chooses the Form, but the defender can opt out for Parma [or ditch Parma and use Vim instead?]. Allow Magical Focus to apply if the cosmetic effect fits (which in practice means "always"), increasing the Te, Fo, or Parma used. Allow investing attunements to gain talisman bonuses to defensive magic, not just attacking magic. Allow raw vis to boost defensive magic. Arcane and symathetic connections and wizard's communion still give advantage to offense, but otherwise this is pretty balanced I think.
A normal magus with normal devotion to Parma (that is, a non-specialist in a Form or in Parma) should be able to defend against the attack of a specialist 10 years senior to the defender.
If I have to specialize in a Form to defend against it, I have a 90% chance of failing.
If I have to specialize in Parma to defend, I am unsafe to specialize in anything else.
If I can't defend against someone moderately better than me, then it's not so awesome a defense. On the other hand, if I can, it means that a newly Gauntleted magus can at least hold his own on the defensive. And it makes Parma a very good investment.
As for reactive fast-casting, I explicitly recommend that mastered spells not have this ability. Casting Totals more than double, and there is much less risk. That is, too big a gap between the Mastered Spell (not likely to botch, no Fatigue ever) and a fatiguing Spont X2.
Huh? Not likely to botch? Fast casting adds two botch dice, a lot of combats I see with 3 or more botch dice, so that means 5 botch dice, meaning a mastery score of 5 to avoid botching altogether and 4 to avoid the risk of Twilight. 75 or 50 XP isn't anything to sneeze at. Fatiguing oneself in combat isn't going to keep you in combat for very long, after three rounds of fast cast defending and using fatigue, you're at a -3 to all your actions. At best you can do it for two more rounds and then pass out. Then what?
And fatiguing with a mastered spell is still possible, since you have to take a -10 to your roll. Unless you're CS is level of the spell +10 (no guarantee here) you've got a decent chance of fatiguing yourself anyway. Unless you change the entire fast casting dynamic to not include the -10 to the roll, but even still the fatigue from forcing spontaneous magic means you're going to be in trouble in about a minute...
Unless you're a Diedne, which would make their virtue not suck! /2
But yes, I see where you're going. Maybe if fast casting is limited to defense against supernatural effects, the associated penalties can be reduced or removed. But again, a Formulaic spell will always work, well, nearly.
/2