Strongest Art?

Games Discussion Ars Magica
41

Whats common and whats possible need not be the same.

And why restrict the setting artifically? The reasons you note doesnt need to be a real problem. Its not like you´re likely to run into a 300+ year old magi everywhere even with making the most out of the rules.

Thats ridiculous.

Healthy Feauture*3(from Covenants), +3 total
Living conditions modifier +1 or +3
Faerie Blood or Strong Faerie Blood, +1 or +3 bonus to aging rolls
Familiar effect, +4(and not to unreasonably you can probably also get +4 against botch rolls)
Stamina(I dont recall if this is RAW or not so partially include it), +2

So, we potentially have an aging modifier of 6-15, before longevity ritual.
Making a 145 year lifespan quite likely to be less than average.

42

Very true, but the above scenario was not very unreasonable. Even if most longevity specialists do not reach the above Lab Totals, their Lab Totals would not be so much lower. Highly effective Longevity Rituals are a consequence of following the rules as they are.

Most of these reasons apply even if these are relatively rare, but why would they be so rare? A single lonevity specialist could very reasonably create, say, 7 longevity rituals per 15 years, so that only a few are needed for the entire Order to acquire one during his lifetime. Even if not all would enjoy a ritual as optimized as above, again, this is simply not necessary - even less optimization will lead to very high ages. Making the most of the rules definitely mean that 300+ year old magi would be roaming about everywhere.

Besides, it is always a good idea to limit the setting artifically, so that the setting would be a good and fun background to your gaming, rather than an excercise in simulation or a study in history.

The lifespan that is recommened (for magi) is 145 years. It doesn't ft the rules - longevity specialists mean that it would be higher. Since the lifespan is determined by Warping and hence by fiat on how often magi get into Twilight, especially at old age - this is completely arbitrary. I don't think assuming magi would practically automatically go into Twilight at Warping 10 and will on average gain 2 Warping Points per year is so sensible, but that's the assumption, and you modifiers won't really change that. (Enigmatic Wisdom will, slightly... as would Strong Faerie Blood... but neither too significantly, I think.)

The extra modifiers you list (except for Stamina, which doesn't enter the formulas) would increase the theoretical lifespan of some magi, certainly - some could enjoy 120 more years (summing up all these benefits), and more (strong faeri blood gets you another 15 years). But this just isn't what determines the age of magi in the setting. The longevity rituals of the Order are far more powerful, or at least should be, for their level to the consideration here.

43

I think you missed the point. The modifiers i listed is enough to give a 145 year life WITHOUT using any longevity ritual at all.
Meaning that with a good set of aging modifiers, a magi can easily skip the warping point gained from the ritual for an extra 30-50+ years, meaning at 145 years, the magi wont be on her deathbead nor be near twilight(so needs alot of bad luck to die or twilight).

Ah ok, i wasnt sure what the RAW was for that, we have added it to the aging roll simply because the description of it fits so well... Well and we found we liked it. A solid health/stamina etc equalling a longer life, not a bad modifier i think.

Doesnt need to be. Try redoing your calculation after adding a living condition of +3(not very hard to achieve), a triple of healthy feature virtues(while not entirely common to that degree, after Covenants were published it has become a quite desirable choice) a Familiar Bronze cord of +4(not a problem to get even if a +3 might be more likely) and Strong Faerie Blood at +3.
Instead of +41 you get +53.
Even if you cut it down to good living conditions and a Familiar that changes it to +47. And again, it could allow waiting a "little" with the ritual, to avoid getting warping.
Coupled with the Gold cord effect, the risk of twilight and the amount of warping gained should be low.
When do you need a ritual do you think, if you have +13 to the aging roll from other sources?

44

Yeah, I did. Yes, these kind of characters will live very long lives even without any longevity potions. Oh well.

I'd still restrict them, by fiat. I just don't want old magi roaming around in my setting.

[qupte]When do you need a ritual do you think, if you have +13 to the aging roll from other sources?
[/quote]

Hard to say, but a reasonable first estimate would simply be to add 130 years to all the above ages. I'll try to run the math later.

45

The main concern is not about rolling a 22+ - that's a longshot*. The worry is rolling a 13. And here we get into metagaming and numbers, unfortunately.

(* Re 22+: any normal number on the dice that's doubled once is 20 or less. So you need to get to x4, or roll "1" twice - that's 1% just to start - before you then roll some number large enough to bump well over 22. With any decent total, that's going to drop well below .5% (1/2%), maybe toward or below .1% (1/10%, .001)

+12 is actually a good number, and better than +13 (or even +15!!!). You can't roll 13 with +12 to the roll* - roll a "1", the next number is doubled - you might roll a 22+ (with double 1's), but never a 13.

* If your total is any even amount (-12, -14, etc), you have no chance to roll a 13. Roll a "1", double the next roll, that number will be even - and an even number minus an even number cannot equal an odd number. (13 is odd, for those who turn green at the sight of "math").

But every 10 years, if nothing else changes, the total will drop by -1, and so shift from odd to even. What then is a "safe" buffer to avoid the dread 13?

Some are comfortable with -14, on the theory that ~if~ you roll a "1", then you still have to roll just one specific number (or another 1) - that's at most a 1/10 x 2/10 = 2% chance - many can live with that.

On the other hand, if you have the lab total and the vis, and just want to crush it, then every bit larger is better. You could even invent two huge LR's, one even and one odd, and alternate for a while, every ten years - no one says you have to use the "best" one, it's just assumed. And since 13 is out of the picture, unless you roll 1, 1, and then some appropriately large number (less than a 1% chance), you're safe.

46

Nice calculation, YR7

I like when the rules are consistent with the description of the world. So what do you think if the characters would automatically went to twilight if they reach warping score 9? This way noone would be able to get more than 224 warping points.
This would limit the life far more and actually reflect the state of the rulebook only a few can live more than 120 years after apprenticeship.

DIREWOLF75:
YR7 made a calculation for an avarage magus. Only a few magi are faeire blooded, may have very healthy location or get +4 bonus from his familiar.

47

I think that this is a flaw in this analysis. It does not seem reasonable to think that a magus can somehow accumulate all the vis to make these rituals, and the political capital (or more vis) to convince a specialist to make the rituals, and the spare vis to recreate the ritual if it fails (or someone dispells it!) without having to expose himself somehow to the possibility of botching a casting roll and entering twilight. If nothing else, he runs the risk of having to defend this stockpile of vis from other magi who declare Wizard War so that they can kill him and capture the vis for their own longevity rituals.

Even if he is very cautious it seems unlikely he will make it much past his 200s; as he will likely have a Warping Score of 10 by then and will enter Eternal Twilight if he enters Twilight.

48

Yes, that would work. I would personally set the end at score 10 (275 XP) for aesthetics, but perhaps score 9 works better.

This would still allow considerable leeway in accumulating Warping Points - even if the average magus accumulates 2 WP per year, a careful magus should be able to push the avergae somewhat lower and so live longer. But this small change to the rules does make the rules fit the setting much better.

This is a very saga-dependent thing.

I think that a careful sorcerer who has prepared for this eventuality has very little reason to use risky magic. Mastered formulaic spells are superior regardless, and there is a low probability that whatever last-ditch efforts he will find necessary to wield will actually induce Twilight (it only happens rarely, after all).

Remember also that the problem lies with older, not young, magi. I think by the time the magus grows old enough for it to be a problem he has likely found himself a nice equilibrium in his Autumn/Winter covenant, and sends off younger magi to risky enterprises. While he would not avoid risk entirely, he is not a PC and his life isn't filled with excitement and adventure like a PC's. I reckon elder NPC magi can avoid risky enterprises rather regularly.

The stockpile of raw vis may indeed be a tempting target in a poor-vis saga, but I don't think that it will in most sagas. Hermetic society will not look kindly at people stealing raw vis from each other like this, so I don't think Wizard Wars are a great risk here.

All of these considerations are very much an "IMS" thing. This appears to me to be the reasonable state of affairs, but I can totally accept that it doesn't seem convincing and plausible at all to you. No one is right, it's just a matter of how you choose to view Hermetic society.

49

A lot of magi are pursuing mystery goals which brings some danger, too.
In my short gaming experience I didn't see much magical botches and no chance entering twilight. Nobody learns from vis because the covenant has many books.
The latest editions favour learning from tractatus too much. Vast number of tractatus is a reasonable conclusion by raw. Learning from vis is exceptionally expensive compared to its efficiency. However learning from vis could be an obvious source of warping.
So very limited or no tractatus would lead to a situation very old magi would have lower arts. Thus a magus should choose between the long life and the power.

I opened a thread about the Hermetic society https://forum.atlas-games.com/t/hermetic-society/3565/1

50

Figure that most magi in the 145 age range are going to be making enemies whether they like it or not. Figure also that, one day, you're going to botch and it isn't going to be pretty.
I'm sure it's possible for a door mouse of a wizard to avoid conflict for a few centuries if he really, really wanted to, but what's the point of near-immortality if you're just sitting around?

"So you lived to 400 and accomplished absolutely nothing. Congratulations."

51

Actually it is possible to have few to no botch dice most of the time. I recently made a flambeau with flawless magic, cautious sorcerer and mastered spells. In hostile auras up to level 3, she has 0 botch dice for her formulaic spells (some have no botch dice for auras 4 or 5). In magic auras, rituals of level 20 or less have no botch dice.

Once she sets up her lab, she will take all the safety measures she can to have minimal botch dice there as well.

This means she might never roll for twilight and in normal course of things, will never botch (save spont spells). This is not to say that I see her living to a ripe old age, just that botches, warping and twilight won't be the factor (she is designed to enter hostile auras (faerie, divine, infernal and wipe out the foes on their home ground. Eventually she will meet her match).

the only cap to her arts will be accessibility of the vis and books.

52

Gah... Dreadful.

His original calculations included just a single +1 from living conditions, no that is NOT average.

Dont forget to find her a familiar as well then. A +3 or +4 Gold and Bronze cord should make sure she has problems neither with warping nor with aging for quite a while.
Probably well beyond the time she, as you said, meet her match... Which is most likely the reason there are few really old wizards running around. Always something interesting to do or some nasty figure to run in to at the wrong time and place...

53

Why dreadful? Long-lived magi are just bad for the setting, IMO. I don't want magi who can nostalgically reminisce about the Schism War or the foundation of House Ex Miscellanea. I want history to remain history, to be discovered and distorted rather than relived through eye-witness accounts at every Flambeau gathering.

Perhaps not, but I was being conservative. Additional modifiers will only make magi older and more powerful, and the whole point of my analysis was to show that magi get to be too old and powerful if you follow the rules.

Perhaps this is a bone of contention between us. I don't see NPC magi as having so many interesting things to do. That's what PCs are for. For me, an NPC magus just doesn't put himself in danger that often.

54

Hi. I think there is a mistake here. p81, rules say "The magnitude of Ritual spells, and the need to incorporate many elements, mean that they (=> rituals) are always cast using a stress die.
But maybe i'm the one misunderstanding?

Are you people sure that help in laboratory also add their Magic Theory*2 to the limit of vis in one season for laboratory activities? I just never figured this out before, but i'm not a rule specialist.

Someone pointed out that longevity ritual can be dispelled. I never considered this before, and actually, it sounds quite realistict, since it's a form of enchantment. What kind of Pe Vi guideline would allow such a dispel?

Thanks :slight_smile:

55

This rule conflicts with the rule on Mastered Spells, which is also 'absolute', that Mastered spells don't require botch dice. The compromise, if I remember correctly, is that Mastered Ritual spells can be cast using a stress die but no botch die.

I do not remember any subtle rule-thingie about rituals cast in Magic auras.

Then again, my memory is a very unreliable thing.

Regardless, the rules in your saga should make it possible for magi to regularly cast Ritual spells with no chance to botch, as otherwise the casting of the Aegis of the Hearth (as well as other spells) becomes unreasonable.

No, I don't think so. That is not necessary, a Magic Theory of 15 is plausible for our specialist above and is enough to support 30 pawns, i.e. brew a potion for a magus of up to age 300. So a magus has up to age 300 to approach a specialist to make his first ritual; he later doesn't make rituals, he just rebrews the old stock.

No idea.

In general, I think permanent spells such as the Familiar, Talisman, or Longevity Ritual should not be subject to dispelling. I'd personally make dispelling each a unique Ritual spell.

56

Well, the relevant rules are:

“[Formulaic Spells, p. 81] If the maga is not under any pressure, it is a simple die. If the maga has mastered the spell, the die is always a stress die, but in a calm situation there are no botch dice, even if the maga is in a strange aura”

“[Ritual Spells, p. 81] they are always cast using a stress die”

[Realm Interaction, on p. 183] “Auras also affect the number of botch rolls for an attempted supernatural act in a foreign realm. For each point of aura rating, roll an extra botch die.”

[Using Raw Vis, p. 83] “For every pawn of vis used, the maga must roll an extra botch die if the casting roll is stress and comes up a zero. This includes the pawns used to make a Ritual spell possible. Remember that, if the maga can cast the spell under calm conditions, she can use a simple die and thus avoid the possibility of botching.”

[Spell Mastery, p. 86] “Mastered spells are always cast with a stress die, but if the maga is relaxed there are no botch dice, even in a non-magi aura or when using vis.”

So, I'm thinking that Ritual spells do require a stress die even in calm circumstances, as per the second p. 81 quote. Rituals are always cast with a stress die. However, mastered spells are always cast with no botch dice if the maga is relaxed, and this always I believe trumps the previous one - so you can cast a Ritual spell with no chance of botch by mastering it.

57

I'd say that casting a Ritual is never done on a relaxed manner.

58

Yes, helpers add their MT scores to the primary researcher's scores.

Even it could be dispelled the spell level would be high which means the penetration would be low. It's not a real option.

59

Where are you getting this from? I'm seeing that assitants are said to increase the researacher's Lab Total, not his scores. I remember there is some confusing language towards the end, but IIRC it is just some sloppy re-rendition of the text at the start of the Aid In The Lab section.

60

Agreed. Assistants aid lab total and not MT AFAIK(and everyone else here that i ever played with who knows the rules).