there are several references in the cannon to virtues being taught. Specifically during apprenticeship. House virtues are in this bracket. Some of the mystery virtues are described in this way, although a mechanic is provided and it is technically part of the initiation. Cirtues like potent magic are described as being passed down rather than strictly initiated.
Does anyone permit this in their saga and what mechanics do they use?
I am rather unhappy with the situation whereby the starter virtues are an inalienable set much like original D&D statistics. I see no reason why they couldn't and shouldn't be permitted to grow, although I would be perfectly happy to require a flaw to be acquired at the same time that corresponded.
Now, if the argument is it takes the 15 years of apprenticeship to develop these virtues by absorbtion then fine, but magi live a very long time - they certainly live long enough to make such a choice, even if it is ill advised.
I think they are talking about the "Supernatural Virtues", and there are rules for teaching them in the Core book. It's just it's something you want to do before you train someone in the Arts because your score in each Art is subtracted from the teaching total.
I divide virtues somewhat differently for my saga - virtues are either inherent or learned, and Hermetic virtues in particular are renamed either Hermetic or Mystery. Hermetic Virtues can likewise be inherent or taught - someone with Strong Faerie Blood (Winter) who also takes cyclical magic will have that affinity as a result of their blood, for instance.
Inherent virtues cannot normally be taught, though I'll cheerfuly allow that as a reasonable research goal. Taught virtues are just that, and can be learned by spending time working with someone on relevent subjects for either two or four seasons for minor or major virtues respectively. This doesn't have to be direct teaching of the virtue per se, but could for instance involve teaching magic theory to pass on new information about a focus or some such.
Mystery Virtues are nonHermetic magic which is grafted crudely into the Hermetic framework - these must be initiated, as it is a magical process of attunement. The teaching of taught virtues is likewise, and could be considered a minor ordeal and initiation, but since the students magic is already aligned towards Hermetic magic, this is far less arduous that might otherwise be the case. Research can of course mor fully integrate the virtues into Hermetic magic and make them teachable, as has happened in various cases in the Order's history. Oh, and Ranges and Targets are never mystery virtues unless some other nonHermetic magic is required to use them - they can be learned by learning a fully Hermetic spell using them, as usual.
That's my take, anyway. Hermetic lineages become possible, minor mystery (with a lower case m) cults become possible (covenant wide, for instance) and the truly impressive Mysteries become more mysterious by being further removed from mundanity.
So far, precisely one magus has inquired into learning more Virtues, balked at being the unpaid labmonkey of another magus and decided against it.
Have played with teached virtues allowed, and it tends to either be to troublesome to bother with or to good to not make use of depending on how hard you make the process.
Very hard to balance. BUT, also very nice to have included.
That just makes it look like a game. That you MUST balance things out, not good for "suspension of disbelief".
It also would mean that if someone has an accident that is the same as a flaw they SHOULD get a virtue from it. Just as bad.
Setting an XP requirement like 30 for a Minor and 75 for a Major, with any formerly learnt virtues reducing XP gain by 1 for minor and 3 for major.
Thats ONLY for Virtues with associated abilities IIRC?
At least i certainly hope it is, as otherwise anyone can learn a virtue per season...
That's what it says. P. 166, AM. "Supernatural Abilities can only be taught if they have an associated Ability, in game terms". I think that is what is being referenced when the books talk about "teaching virtues".
HoH:TL states that Hermetic Virtues may be taught in the same way, treating them such that an effective minimum XP would be required as if to acquire an ability at level one, and notes that Hermetic Arts and Abilities do not subtract from the XP total - Mystery initiations are to get around that difficulty. I felt that was a little too easy, hence my ruling mentioned above, but it is canonical.
I don't know. It gives a little "kick" to the more social mages, who might actually know someone who has the virtue and is willing to teach it. And gives "House lore" a sharper point. Want to learn this obscure virtue? Lore check to figure out which of maybe ten mages in your house will talk to you, be willing to teach it to you, without breaking the bank when it comes to paying back the favor.....
Where does it say that in TL? I have never noticed it, but I humbly regret I am no master of the rules. I would be grateful for a pointer.
I knew about supernatural abilities associated with virtues that is in core, but if Hermetic virtues can be taught under the main rules that would be a useful development.
As a player trying to optimize, I love the way virtues can be learned. And it's now so easy, too! Supernatural Abilities can be taught, any virtue can be initiated, and a few measly xps in the Magic Realm also yield yummy virtues. Oh, yes, Twilight too. I'm probably missing one.
But....
From the outside, either looking at the rules or contemplating TSIDR, I think such things should be severely limited in a scope. In Ars Magica, virtues and flaws are the primary way to differentiate characters one from another. These describe unique abilities, social position, even personality. Making everything available to everyone blands things. I also note that in real life, people are pretty much who they are long before they are 30. They develop and mature, maybe even make changes (and that more so in the modern than medieval world), but that's it. I think AM already suffers in allowing anyone to learn any skill.
I do like the idea that magi might have more than 11 virtue points... but at the cost of flaws. That is, magi who load up on Hermetic Virtues and Flaws to create a 'style of magic' for his lineage are Good, not Bad. (I'd probably also want to rule that a magus who exceeds the normal limit must have at least one Major Hermetic Flaw.) So then we'd have starting magi with maybe 18 virtues and 17 flaws, and most Mystery Virtues help define that style quite nicely; over the next 100 years he might accumulate three or four more virtues.
It should also be remembered that there's a kind of economy at work in the starting rules that gets bent as virtues are easier to come by. One virtue point during character creation is worth 50xp plus a little extra. This is quite consistent. So Educated gives 50xp and the right to dump other xps into Academic Abilities, Warrior works similarly for Martial Abilities, Good Parens gives more xps and even some spells, but doesn't loosen any restrictions and you have to be a magus, and so on. Well-Traveled and Mastered Spells just provide 50xp. Thus, if we want a game where virtues are nothing special, and can be learned like anything else, we probably still want virtues to retain their cost: At least 50xp.
Finally, I prefer to view apprenticeship as a kind of Initiation. That is, for Hermetic Magic there's a script involving 15 years of service to a master, the master's sacrifice of 15 seasons teaching, and so on. This very flexible script leaves room for virtues and flaws to be developed.
In our society by then most people have completed their education and settled into a profession,
People in acedemic/profesisonal circles develop their skills constantly. Magi definitely fit into these categories.
People experiencing career change do this heavily and in a very short term and focussed way.
When vital new skills arrive into the scene people adapt to them quickly - such as the internet imperialism that has swamped many professions. I have known a very large number of older people develop these skills in a very short space of time. What they have, and which I presume most hermetic magi have - is a learning imperative.
I say this specifically in response to your comment about SKILLS post 30, not virtues.
That's not exactly what it says... it states that Hermetic Virtues derived from Major Breakthroughs are teachable, not Hermetic Virtues in general.
They specifically include an example of a maga achieving a Major Breakthrough and inventing the Hermetic Virtue, Life Boost. This then becomes a teachable Virtue. A second Major Breakthrough integrates that Virtue with Hermetic theory such that if you know Hermetic Magic you also know Life Boost.
I think it's fair to assume that some Hermetic Virtues are of the "teachable" variety, as results from Major Breakthroughs... but that's not necessarily all Hermetic Virtues.
This is true in our modern world, but we have developed a lot of infrastructure to make this happen. When it happened in the ancient world--and it did--it was considered extremely remarkable, itself part of a person's myth. 30yo now is very different from then, it might be remembered. It's middle age! You're gonna be dead soon. People could advance skills, absolutely, and diversify, but a shepherd retraining to become a scholar at the age of 40 is Mythic. People learn under duress, but the 40yo blacksmith who is forced to become a sailor is very different from the one who (unrealistically and rarely, imo) undertakes a whole new apprenticeship in a different field.
Ken's Optional Very Way Out There (like post AM5) Rules for Abilities
There is no such thing as Exposure experience. People learn slowly from Exposure, and this learning is represented by a new game mechanic.
The Wealthy and Poor Flaws no longer provide extra seasons. They simply make a character rich or poor.
Every character gains 1xp per season of his life, which accumulate into a Personal Experience Score as though it were an Ability. A character adds his Personal Experience to, and subtracts his Decrepitude Score from, every roll and total that includes at least one non-Supernatural Ability.
Every character adds his Warping Score to every roll and total that includes at least one Art or Supernatural Ability.
Most characters have no time to study or be taught after their apprenticeship; they gain xps only through adventure. They are too busy working, socializing and simply living. This includes grogs, and even most of the nobility. The skill they develop over time is represented (quite generously) by their Personal Experience. Magi and a few others are the rare exception; it is their withdrawal from worldly affairs that gives them time to study.
A character's skills upon completing his apprenticeship or similar youthful development can be represented using the current rules, but I'll eventually have different rules for this too, something like "every character gets N skills at level 3, with virtues and flaws modifying the number of skills and the level of individual skills." (Jack of all Trades then returns as a Major Virtue, removing the -3 penalty from all general abilities that are not lores.)
Example: A 32 year old farmer is haggling with a 32yo merchant. Both have a Personal Experience of 6 (132xp). The farmer does not have a bargaining skill, and has Com -1, so he takes a +2 to the roll. The merchant has +2 Com and Bargain 3+2, so has a +13. The merchant is going to do well on the exchange, as he should: He spends his life bargaining. Note that the farmer steadily improves his ability to bargain based on his experience in life, just as he also learns when not to argue with his wife, and when to insist on his way.
Wouldn't the farmer have a +2? You did not add his personal experience to the total.
I find this approach not too radical, and quite likely. However, it has the problem that you need to have all your abilities listed exactly when the character enters play (no time to learn new area lores or languages, even if you have a new (german) lord or you are a travelling minstrel), so you are likely to end up with a list of skills that looks like a shopping list more than anything. Also, if you develpoped area lore Normandy in your youth and then moved to Ireland (not likely, but far from unlikely) you will get extra experienc ein area lore Normandy with time, even if you have no contact at all with Normandy.
For one I have a brawl skill of 1 from some martial arts courses I took quitew a while ago.ñ I can assure you that this skill has NOT improved with time "just becase". I never get into fights and left training a while ago.
SO this system is cool for abilities you use on a regular or semiregular basis, but not for abilities you have that are hardly used.
I have thought about both of these issues, and realize that the rule needs tweaking. Most characters, however, don't move around all that much. The ones who do right at the start can take Well-Traveled as a virtue, which lets them treat any vaguely reasonable Area Lore as a 0; even if they have never been to a city before, they know enough about cities in general to quickly get the hang of things, and perhaps have been somewhere nearby, or know how to find the contacts to bring them up to speed. It also remains possible to take a second or third Area Lore as a starting skill. This spreads the character a bit thinner, yet the time spent learning a culture does the same thing. Languages are iffier. In general, people don't learn languages well after puberty. Some simple rules can cover these circumstances.
The idea here is not to model every single possible character, because that path leads to madness, and thousands of skills. No game system can handle this well. (I anticipate someone mentioning GURPS, yet I consider that a fine example of "not handling this well.")
The price of conciseness (and accuracy) is often loss of precision.
And the time you spent dabbling in Martial Arts is probably not sufficient to make that one of your fundamental skills. Especially since you never got into fights. Your not having a martial arts score is similar to the way a peasant might go to church religiously yet never get a score in Theology.
It works pretty well for that. Brawl is a general ability, which means that anyone can do it. You've brawled a little, sorta kinda, so have general experience with it. You will be crushed by someone who actually has Brawl as a skill, which is the way it ought to be. There is a touch of unreality, I acknowledge, in that these rules would regard you as a better brawler today, because you are older, than you were right after you dabbled. Yet that's about the granularity of general skills and of any rules system. In general, a person gets better at the skills he has and dabbles in. The rules assume that everyone can Brawl. So we get to the problem you raise.
I have thought about this problem, and about getting rid of General Abilities, or changing how they work. I'm not sure that extra complexity is needed though, to deal with cases of this kind. considers The 60 year old merchant with Personal Experience 9, no Brawl, and Dex -2 would get to roll die+4. That's probably a little too good--but we're also assuming that he didn't take the non-combatant flaw. considers again Ah! I forgot a rule: The Decrepitude Score subtracts from any roll that includes a non-Supernatural Ability. Now everything falls into place nicely, with the merchant probably rolling die+1 and risking extra botch dice. I'm comfortable with that for the typical merchant, who really doesn't Brawl. The blacksmith who can brawl would take it as one of his starting skills. (laughs at myself I haven't yet gotten around to rewriting any combat rules. But I'd certainly feature Str as the key characteristic, not Dex.)
So, the decrepit merchant bargains worse than the newbie merchant from across the street just because he is old, even if he has 4 times the experience level (a lifteme's worth of it) of the newbie?
This brings us to the following system, more or less:
CHARACTER GENERATION:
make a supermarket list of all the abilities you have.
Each ability you chose costs 20 XP (more than level 2, less than level 3), so you can have a substantial number of them.
The abilities have a skill level of 0.
Area lore and languages restricted to 3 each unless you have the well travelled or another similar virtue. You can take one supernatural lore (usually faerie lore).
You can have a single martial skill if you want. That costs DOUBLE (40 XP), though. After all, peasants and pilgrims used weapons (slings and staves) to defend against wolves and the like.
Ability-granting V&F give you 30 XP. Those XP can be invested in several abilities to get extra "punch" in it. If you dump it all in a single ability, it will be the equivalent of puissant (+2), while if you dump it in 3 abilities, it will be the equivalent of a +1 to each ability
Your starting XP is determined by age. 4XP per year. A 20 year old (80 seasons) has a general ability of 4 in all his abilities, and access to 15 abilities. The problem comes when a character with 25 years of experience has access to 18 starting abilities instead of 15.
I think it takes water all around, but looks like the system is into something. For TheoryArs this is fun
Let's take a look at this. Both have a base skill 3+2. The 30yo has a personal experience of 6. He is at the peak of his game, the prime of his life, when the vigor of youth and the wisdom of experience are in balance. Well, almost at the peak. When he reaches 35, he's really at his peak! By a pleasant coincidence , 35*4 =140, or Personal Experience 7. So there he is, about to make his first aging roll. He has reached the point in his life where experience is going to offer very little compared to what aging is about to take away. This is as it should be. He's going to look back on the good old days.
But let's return to the 30yo. He's looking at die + 11 + Com. The 60yo is lucky to be alive. He's hanging on. Most of his peers are already dead. He might even have seen some of his children grow to adulthood and died. He has more experience, yes, but doesn't have as much energy or drive. He tires more easily. He fumbles for the right word. His memory is less sharp. He's.... he's old, way past his prime. He's looking at die + 5 (base) + 9 - 3 (decrepitude) + Com (which is probably down a few points from when he was 30). So he's still pretty much holding his own, maybe down a point or two, maybe not. That's not so bad! And if he's done well on aging rolls, perhaps because he's been a successful merchant with good living modifiers, he might be ahead of the 30yo.
This is still working the way it ought to. It feels right, age chasing experience.
Well, I'd change the combat system, so that Brawl can be used with any weapon.
Let's leave combat aside for a moment, as it deserves special treatment.
This is why I'd rule differently.
I'd not base the number of skills a character has on age, nor the number of experience points. Instead, childhood grants a few childhood skills, adolescence grants a few more skills, various virtues and flaws can add or remove skills, and other virtues and flaws can increase the base value of a few skills. Status virtues, in particular, expand a character's skills, which also reflect upon his status.
Then, very few characters would ever gain experience points, because this is already abstracted. Suddenly, a grog can be listed as a name, perhaps ten skills (and I'd find ways to contract the skill list at least a little), a few virtues and flaws, an age, a date of birth, a decrepitude score and a sentence or two of roleplaying notes. Companions are a bit more complex, but not by much. More notes, more vfs, more skills. Magi are a lot more complex, and that's a good thing.
Yes, it's still not quite there. Almost, though; and I think they're good enough to play-test. (Close enough that I have been willing to post my thoughts, unlike, say, my library and book rules, which are not as good as my last stake in the ground of "read for a season and get 10xp.")
Hardly. Anyone at the time who has lived to 30 is VERY likely to live past 50 as well.
Thats overstating it. Uncommon sure(especially in the case of your very extreme example), but not "never gonna happen".
Not when you dont know it will be needed. Which is what totally kills your mechanics.
"Not as well" isnt the same as "doesnt happen".
Most doesnt equal all.
This would mean a whole bunch of real persons cannot exist.
Or have Ability Score 0 cost 10-15 XP to avoid people taking lots of "cheap" Score 1 abilities at start.
As getting any score means being rid of the penalty, its both decent mechanically and for realism.
For TheoryArs this is fun 
, 35*4 =140, or Personal Experience 7. So there he is, about to make his first aging roll. He has reached the point in his life where experience is going to offer very little compared to what aging is about to take away. This is as it should be. He's going to look back on the good old days.