Your example uses might 10 demons. Might 10 creatures are not an equal match against a newly gaunleted magus in regards to any of their other abilities.
The issue with non-penetrating wards in this example is that if the ward can penetrate then other spells can penetrate as well if this character has 5's in rego and vim odd's are good that he'd be able to penetrate with one of the following as well: rego mentem, perdo vim.
If instead we use a might twenty creature (something that does have comparable power to a newly gauntleted magus) could not be warded against by this character unless the character spent a year or two studying rego, vim, and penetration.
Many of us like to play a game where after a season of study, a character that has a comfortable familiarity (not a specialization) could put up a ring/circle ward that would hold a creature of equal might at bay.
If you require penetration wards become a tool to be used to fortrify one's covenant when you have a wizard's communion group together. They loose their relevance to magi "in the field" with the exception of characters with wards as a magical focus. Even rego masters will most frequently have better rego spells to use on any creature than a ward. How frequently would someone ward against a might 30 creature when they could pull off a different level 30 rego spell (one that is less specific in use).
If you don't require penetration on ring /circle wards prepared covenants become near unassailable by magical creatures until their wards are borken. But a well prepared covenant would be similarily well protected iin a game where wards need to penetrate because the wards would be put up using wizard's communions.
We've been down this road before and while others have put up coherent arguments for the other position I still believe requiring ring/circle wards to penetrate makes for a game that is less fun.
The house rule that I use (OK, will use when I start up a new game) is:
A creature with might can not pass through or directly act to destroy a stationary ward of a level equal or greater than its might reardless of the penetration of the ward.
Magic resistance in general, and not only with respect to wards, is accepted as a controversial subject in ArM5, as can be seen from the Redcap FAQ, which basically designates it as houserule territory.
(BTW: The central problem with ArM5 magic resistance is that it is dumb, while magi inventing spells are smart.)
That notwithstanding, some time ago I tried to sum up the available evidence in the rules about the effects of magic resistance on wards like this:
Yes, this argument is complex, and - given the prevalence of houserules for the entire magic resistance issue - perhaps of little practical importance. But since the subject of what was really meant in the rules about wards tends to come up again and again, I thought I repeat it anyway.
It might be a good idea to write a comment in the Redcap FAQ on the subject some time, though.
I would note that for young magus, infernal creatures are dangerous creatures no matter their might.
Spontaneus spells are pretty much useless & most formulaic spells, unappropriate. In fact, by looking at the core book, very few level 10 spells would have a working effect to even hamper the creatures.
Big Ignem or Perdo Animal dammage spells are just of higher level & would hence not penetrate the MR of the hounds.
All this indicates to me that these hounds are the upper level of treat you can send to these young magus without ensuring a total party kill ( Grogs & companions can be great saviours for those dire times).
I don't see either the need to boost the ward above all other formulaic spells.
If you like sending stronger opponents toward your players & want them to be soly on the defensive, a good HR would be that if you have a ritual ward, A creature with might can not pass through or directly act to destroy a stationary ward of a level equal or greater than its might reardless of the penetration of the ward. This legacy was derived from the geat breakthru of the Aegis of the Hearth & will only work using the (Touch, Ring, Circle) guidelines.
IMS (plural) grogs and companions are the saviors in 99% of the situations. Magi simply tend to stand in the stage and botch
That is the arch-known peroblem with might in general, that magic is less effective than crude steel against those creatures because of their MR. But we are entering an other area here, so let's stay on the ward issue
Well, again I see the maximizing approach...Lets rewrite the above example..
Scream and Shout: 2
Confidence Point: 0
the character doesn' have any left because he has been using it so many times
We could also point out the possibility of a botch (but that would be maximizing...) and being that he is likely in an Infernal Aura....(Oh yeah we should add that in to the spell total as well..what was it...-3, -8?)
I also would like to point out that you didnt state a duration (never do) ...how long can the magus wait?? I'm sure the demon can wait longer...then when the spell drops the Magus would be forced to use another confidence point and wait some more...repeat and rinse.
I would also like to point out that in the mean time, the Infernal creature has brought his minions.... Various things could be done to make the magus' life difficult if he wanted to 'hole' up and wait out the Demon.
An intresting point to all this is that if you need to penetrate with a ward, it is usually easier to kill demons with your spells than to hold them off... Demon's eternal oblivion can work over several castings to kill a demon, so you can easily use a single versjon of the spell against any kind of demon - and that means you could probably get around to mastering it (leading to higher penetration, multicasting etc).
A very good point. Which also shows that, if wards need to penetrate a beings might, the arcane connections would be given to the PeVi caster, who can make much better use of them than the ReVi warder (making poor overspecialized Miserabilis Exemplaris from https://forum.atlas-games.com/t/ogl-games-archive-links/120/1 even more miserable. ).
My take is that the SG is responsible for building the story around the characters. That's why I find this whole "it's too difficult" argument about ward penetration to be a bit of a smokescreen.
If I know I have a single magus having to defend the child after his grogs hold off the main villains at the ritual site (allowing the magus to flee with the child in the first place) then I'm not going to throw unreasonable foes at the players. It simply wouldn't be fair or fun.
Sure, there should be a threat and a sense of challenge and the risk of botching adds to that. If the magus botches when creating a ward... well, then, I'm afraid... time's up. That's the way it works. That's the game. As a wise man once said, sometimes you've got to roll the hard six.
If, however, I send a beast with might 20 after the magus I'm being unreasonable. Run the same scenario several game-years later and I might be within my gaming rights to raise the tempo and the threat level.
In the example someone posted above, a creature of might 20 was cited. In my opinion, that sounds like fourth edition thinking where your spell casting roll WAS your penetration roll.
Given the options we have (we could hole up in a chapel and take advantage of the aura, etc.) the magus could, given time (and that is down to the SG), work his environment to his advantage, and the SG should support that.
Of course, unless an "official" ruling comes down, I'm happy to enforce a "wards must penetrate" rule in my game. It makes (a kind of) sense just as much as any other option.
Some of the first opponents we faced were demons with might scores of 10-20. At the time we knew no wards, and fought them with Demons eternal oblivion (lvl 10). Since my magus is a vim spesialist this worked fine. Had he known a lvl 20 ward and tried to hold them of with that, then he would not have been able to penetrate their MR with it.
In other words - if you need to penetrate with wards, it is easier to use magic offensivly rather than defensivly...
Demons are subtle. Most of the time, unseen untill too late.
Let us establish the use of DEO vs WAD
DEO Level 10 (Base effect)
Reduce 10 of might from one infernal creature if MR is penetrated
WAD Level 10 (Base effect)
Keep out ALL (not just one) infernal creatures of Might 10 or less (If MR is penetrated) seen or unseen.
Protects from Infernal powers (If MR is penetrated) known or unknown.
Protects a group of people and or objects (Circle effect)
Indefinite Duration (Untill ring is broken)
I agree. Once the ward is casted, there is no reason for the warder to keep the arcane connection. So miserabilis at the end of the day saved his party & can return to his safe warded alliance. Quite rewarding I think.
A difference you missed is that a DEO level 10 is useful against every demon that exisits and a WAD is useful against only the very weakest.
With penetration required for wards, it is always precisly as easy to destroy a creature utterly with a single spell as to hold them at bay with a ring/circle ward. It is always significantly easier to destroy a creature with two spells than to ward against it.
You seem to be concentrating on subtle demons, in adition to these subtle creatures there are un-subtile creatures of all realms. You need to find rules that work for them as well.
Do you really want to play in games where it is easier to destroy creatures than ward against them?
...and I do not agree.
E.G.: A demon wants to use one of his powers across a ward (against demons of course). Does the ward have to penetrate the MR of the demon? Is there now a difference between ranged attacks and personally entering a warded area? This ruling causes more problems and not less! This problem exists right now for the ward against mundanes, but I used this only for "thou shall not enter" spells.
Since a house rule for Aegis is already necessary, I will house rule all wards (first time for a subject covered by ArM5 rules).