Understanding durations, charges and frequency on items

Games Discussion Ars Magica
1

Salvete, Sodales!

I'm planning on playing ArM4e and am a bit unclear on the following topics:

. Are unorthodox, unmentioned frequencies possible? Use of trigger conditions to change the allowed periodicity is possible, though I might want to make a device that requires less levels: a device that works once a month? Once a year? I can see how it could unintentionally make single-use devices too cheap, so that's an issue to consider. What would be your input and advice?

. Speaking of charges… What is the reason for the charge quantities that elevate the level requirement? Wouldn't it be prudent to just enchant the item without those limitations? Or integrate a counting system if you find this absolutely necessary? Is it possible to instill even more charges?

. Speaking of instilling… How does Constant Use interact with durations? Which duration shall I choose? To reword these a bit: does Constant Use prolong the durations or require any?

I only have the 4th Edition Core right now, and I'm unaware of any previous forum threads on those matters. Any links, quotes and general ideas would be greatly appreciated!

2

You are playing 4th Edition. The level of the item represents the complexity of the item. By default the item has 1 use or charge for charged items. As an item with more charges is more powerful, it increases the level if the item by specific amount. The increased elvel also helps when you produce the charged item with laboratory texts, as it adds the level of the laboratory text to the laboratory total when used.

2 Likes
3

It doesn't really answer any of the questions and is mostly false. Did you use an AI?

4

No, I did not, and it did answer to question. It gave reason why charged does add level. I would never use AI, but it has been ages since I used 4th Edition, as it was in all aspects worse than 5th edition.
The item level is calculated by combining the effect level and the item modifiers (which almost all in 4th edition were levels, not magnitudes). I do think 4th edition did have otion to add levels to make item "casted by the user" circumventing the Penetration allocation to the Item Level.
If you do not allocate charges to the item, it has 1 charge or use. I am not sure if 4th edition ahd uses per day, but you are correct. I should've opened my 4th edition PDF or rulebook and check it out (as I do still have both).

1 Like
5

Unorthodox ranges are possible, but requires acceptance of your troupe in 4th edition. Several supplements have them. IIRC they used the higher applicable Hermetic range. The 5th edition begins with this assumption, but changes it on the Mysteries and the True Lineages making special ranges, durations, and targets something you have to invent either through msytery, ancient magic, or original research. If you have duraiton less than a month, but longer than a sun, it is Moon duration equivalent on 4th edition. If you have Sun duration equivalent starting on different moment of day (f. ex. noon and midnight), it is Sun equivalent. Hour would be Sun equivalent as i tis longer than Diameter, but no longer than Sun.

The constant use does not interact with durations - it makes the effect constant. In 5th edition they clarified Constant items are designed with Sun duration and Environmental trigger, and IIRC the 4th edition had same reasoning - it required specific duration and Constant item modification. Constant effect does not flicker at the end of the duration unlike the environmental trigger does.

6

My apologies, it was rude of me to assume that, because of my AI tingles. Though, I'm not sure if  charge is the default:

Charges: It is possible to instill an effect whose power expires after a given number of uses. The following table lists Lab Total modifiers to place a given number of charges in a device. Each time the power you have instilled is activated, one charge is used up. When all the charges have been used, the item stops functioning.

And the following corroborates my assumption:

Note that you must still choose a number of uses per day when you instill an item with charges. Thus such an item is restricted in how often and how much it can be used. You cannot give charges to an item of Constant Use.

I've missed the argument regarding the texts. Now it makes much more sense, though expending Vis, just to slightly increase the total for a specific use seems a bit wasteful. Why would one do that?

1 Like
7

That's a nice but of trivia, though I'm asking a question on the Effect Frequency: the "cooldown" on the devices. I would assume a device, used for a yearly blessing of a field wouldn't benefit from » use per day«, for example.

So, the default duration is used for the purposes of calculating the magnitude?

8

Are unorthodox, unmentioned frequencies possible? Use of trigger conditions to change the allowed periodicity is possible, though I might want to make a device that requires less levels: a device that works once a month? Once a year? I can see how it could unintentionally make single-use devices too cheap, so that's an issue to consider. What would be your input and advice?

Making such "once-in-a-while" devices is in principle possible, but, by the Rules As Written, it does not save any levels. As you correctly point out, for game balance reasons the rulebook wants to avoid making single-charge devices easier by making them usable once-per-century. You could avoid that issue saying that the "low-frequency" devices cannot have charges (like Constant effect devices), but even then, any low-frequency bonus should be worth less than the bonus derived from making a device single-charge (-5). Or perhaps you could say that you can get much larger level reductions for really long inter-use intervals ... if one has to wait for that long after the item is created before first using it. I'd have no issues with a wand usable once-a-century getting a -20 level reduction, for example, if one had to wait for a century after its creation before using it for the first time.

Speaking of charges… What is the reason for the charge quantities that elevate the level requirement? Wouldn't it be prudent to just enchant the item without those limitations? Or integrate a counting system if you find this absolutely necessary? Is it possible to instill even more charges?

It's not possible to "expand" the charge limit once the item is created, only to "top up" used charges. In general you are right, creating charged items with many charges (24+) is inefficient, but it does guarantee that the item will eventually stop working if it falls in the wrong hands - for example, the Order forbids selling enchanted devices to mundanes unless they will eventually exhaust their power.

Speaking of instilling… How does Constant Use interact with durations? Which duration shall I choose? To reword these a bit: does Constant Use prolong the durations or require any?

Constant effectively "prolongs" the duration; you should thus use D:Mom.

I only have the 4th Edition Core right now, and I'm unaware of any previous forum threads on those matters. Any links, quotes and general ideas would be greatly appreciated!

This forum came into existence with 5th edition (20 years ago!) as a friendly venue for new players unfamiliar with previous ones. Thus, discussions almost exclusively focus on the 5th edition rules and setting, which are widely considered the best, at least overall (4th edition, in contrast, is probably the weakest edition mechanically). There are a number of resources for previous editions on the web though. The best point to start in my opinion is Project Redcap.

1 Like
9

What does »weakest mechanically« mean? I've heard that 4e is somehow unbalanced experience-wise and that the houses weren't explored enough in it, but I don't know specifics and I'm currently stuck with the free products. Though, dedicated threads show, that those matters are quite controversial, so I'm satisfied with what I have: I like the diverse prices on Flaws/Virtues, permanent spells and complex magic system.
I would really like to read about in-game circumstances in which the differences shine.

10

To me, it means that the mechanics didn't work very well. Several of us have examples laying around, I'm sure. I remember designing stuff like a CrIg fireball to target the British isles in a single hit, because of how T:Boundary was written, or a starting character who was able to mass-produce flying castles, as long as he had the Vis.
Also, Concentration quickly becomes the most valuable skill in the game, because it adds to the XPs you get per season when you study from books, IIRC (@Christian_Andersen please correct me if I'm wrong).

Essentially, in the first 3 editions, libraries were much simpler, and there were no guidelines per se - each troupe were expected to eyeball spell/effect levels by comparing them to other spells/effects in the game. Also, Arts were explicitly not associated with XPs (something I miss, though I realise I may be the only one).

Then 4th edition came about. And to be honest, it felt like a mess. To me at least.
I would like to point you to this thread: Little Things I Miss From 4th

To be honest, I'm currently unemployed, and my first thought to your original thread was wondering if I could somehow arrange to buy you a (digital) copy of the 5th edition.

1 Like
11

Although, I find those moments weird, it seems to me that those are easily patched by DM's use of common sense to veto such shenanigans: after all, the guidelines aren't there to encourage munchy quirks, but quite the opposite.

That is weird, I would just tear it out, plug the hole with some constant and call it a day. In the end, this skill is about "tightening" the thought muscle and not running the mental marathon (involving memory and analytical abilities).

Arts were explicitly not associated with XPs

I might need to refresh my memory on that, but IIRC 4e is making some abilities a bit silly this way (such as Verditīs boon, if that's the proper linguistic mish-mash)

I would like to point you to this thread: Little Things I Miss From 4th

Oh, looks like a nice thread! I'll look into it!

To be honest, I'm currently unemployed, and my first thought to your original thread was wondering if I could somehow arrange to buy you a (digital) copy of the 5th edition.

I'd strongly ask you not to. I believe in Atlas, and I'd like to pay them tribute myself: if I didn't feel like honouring them, I'd've just pirated the books. But I do believe.
No need to worry about my wellbeing too: I'm ok financially (there are other hopefully temporary circumstances). Besides, I'm learning like ten languages now and reading other stuff so there is no justification to rush the process either. Especially if you don't have a source of stable income.
I'm grateful this community just is (sic!) and I appreciate what all of you do for me already. Thank you for the kindness, attention and insight!
…and for this answer too!

1 Like
12

It would require a lot more than a single post to answer. But let me try to paint a broad picture.
As Tellus mentioned, up to and including 3rd edition, Ars Magica had some very strong, inherent caps on how "powerful" stuff could be (from magi's Arts to grog combat totals), plus it was far more freeform and thus inherently controlled by troupe's judgement. 4th edition tried to make everything more "mechanically explicit", and the mechanics created some completely unbalanced situations. One example is how Attack Advantage could accrue from round to round, so that a skilled warrior would dance around a dragon's blows until he'd eventually slay it with a single punch to the nose. Another is how Concentration+Intelligence becomes the all-important total ... and with some magic that can boost it (e.g. Charms or Baal Shem Amulets) ability scores can grow exponentially with time.

At the end of 4th edition lifetime Atlas explcitly offered a "bounty" to people who would design and run covenants with PC magi for up to 120 years of game time to get a sense of how things would go out of hand, so that 5th edition could be designed better. And 5th edition was far, far better: while it retained the "mechanically explicit" approach of 4th edition (which I am starting to question, after all these years of loving it), it draconically reined in excesses, while boosting things like Parma Magica that, in 4th edition, are not really that useful - it's much more efficient to just have ReVi MR.

1 Like
13

One of those example Covenants had an apprentice who they had to gauntlet at like 10 years because she was already way more powerful than a starting Magus (somewhere like Character Creation +10 years study).

They also had charms which would add a bunch to Concentration. Can't remember if it was +13 or +17, but it was pretty bonkers. They also had ones that increased Communications, which let them write some really high quality books. Their library was insane. It had tiered collections of Libri Quaestionum for all the Arts and important skills, along with some monster Summae that they wrote themselves.

Link

EDIT: Their three mundane scribes had Charms which gave +20~22 to Scribe Latin for example.

14

Even with just the Core rules, it was simply too easy to break the assumptions of the game.

1 Like
15

I'd say that it's a bad thing only if you could do so unintentionally. Though, it looks like that is the case, doesn't it?

1 Like