(Noble's Parma)
The thing I have with (demon) wards having to penetrate is that it makes DEO so powerfull.
You've got your might 40 devilkin, who you're trying to keep out of your countryside cottage. You can than:
blast it with a couple of penetration 40 PoF's (casting totals of 60 needed)
ward your cottage with a level 40 ward + 40 penetration = CT 80
Obliviate him with four lvl 10 DEO's, needing 40, 30, 20 and 10 penetration. (using some Vis for the first casting means that this is possible with CT of around 40)
I know it's not a completely fair comparison, but IMHO a warding should be a lot easier than blasting the bastard. If warding is easier than destroying, you've created some story potential. (you can safely hide in your 'castle,' but some day you will have to hunt him down)
So my take on the matter is: wards don't need to penetrate.
Side track:
There is a different type of spell in the books: ward against humans, which needs to penetrate magic resistance to affect magi. I always did rule that such a spell should penetrate. I see the difference in that the general wards get more expensive when you wards against higher might and the anti-magi ward gets more expensive due to penetration.
Well, the RAW says that they have to penetrate. But looking at your point anyway...
Only if nuking the demon is the same as warding against it.
For example, you don't need to detect the presence of any particular demon (which can be problematic) to ward a place against demons. Whereas you do need to detect the demon to target it with a DEO. The magus (or a wand or similar) needs to be around to cast the DEO. On the other hand, you can cast the ward and then leave.If there are lots of demons you are interested in, then one ward could deal with them all, whereas you will need many DEO. For example, wandering through some kind of den of demons is a hell of a lot easier with a personal ward than it is with DEO.Nuking demon ducklings with DEO surely means that an angry, demonic mother duck will show up, eventually. Alternatively, say you nuke lots of little faeries with the faerie equivalent of DEO, then there is a chance that sooner or later some sort of faerie king will come looking for you; whereas if you just ward against the little faeries, their king may be less interested.If you want to cage something to interrogate, study or command it, then a ward is a bit more useful.When we consider things other than demons (say magic critters and faeries) some magi may have moral qualms about indiscriminate murder, and so prefer to use wards. IMO, it is all the more satisfying (from a story perspective) if it is more difficult to ward than destroy; that is, the characters have to go out of their way to act morally. Gasp!
In other words, DEO and wards are not comparable in the way you are trying to compare them. They do different things. Which is best depends at least as much on the context as the relative casting totals required.
You create stories either way, IMO. Isn't hunting down a demon, exactly what your characters are doing when they go out to cast DEO?
I disagree. Page 161, ArM5, Aegis of the Hearth spell description: "This ritual protects a covenant in the way a Parma Magica protects a magus."
Just like a magus's Parma doesn't need to penetrate the magic resistance of a creature affecting the magus, an Aegis of the Hearth does not need to penetrate. This is the source of confusion with wards. If AotH doesn't need to penetrate, why should wards? ArM5 explains it away saying Notatus created a Hermetic breakthrough with AotH. If you want wards to not need to penetrate, create a Hermetic breakthrough, say someone else already has, Columbae of HoH: Societates for example.
The way I think I will rule it (since my group yet has to bring its Aegis up), is that the magic damping effect doesn't need to penetrate (whether you are a magus or a creature) because it affects the radiant vis in the area, but the creature-warding effect needs to penetrate like any other ward.
So basically, Aegis of the Hearth is a ward against supernatural creatures of all realms, with a major beneficial side effect that damps magic for anyone who didn't participate in the ritual.
I think that all that sentence is meant to mean is that conceptually Aegis is the Hearth is like Parma Magica; not that it is meant to follow the same rules, because it clearly doesn't. For example, AotH requires vis to cast, whereas Parma Magica doesn't. We all know that the reason AotH requires vis is that it is a ritual spell, whereas Parma Magica isn't. For the same reason AotH needs to penetrate, because it is a spell effect, whereas Parma Magica isn't.
I think that part of the confusion is that AotH has several effects and sometimes when we talk about it we really only mean one of its effects, rather than the whole gamut of its effects. Seeing as this thread is about wards I was mostly thinking of AotH's ward-like effects, rather than its Parma Magica-like effects. I think that some of AotH's effects need to penetrate and some don't. I think that the most consistent way to play it would be:The ward-like effect of the Aegis needs to penetrate the magic resistance of the creatures attempting to cross the boundaryThe penalty-to-the-casting/penetration-total needs to penetrate the magic resistance of the foreign magi/creatures who are casting from within the aegis.The magic resistance provided against incoming effects does not need to penetrate the magic resistance of the caster of those effects.
I think that this is consistent with, that fact that wards need to penetrate, that spells that decreases an opponent's Attack Score needs to penetrate his magic resistance(whereas a spell that increases your Soak Score does not) and John's point that the Parma-Magica like effect should in some way be like Parma Magica.
You said there was no support. I provided support.
Nice strawman argument. Nobody argued that AotH is supposed to follow all the rules of Parma Magica. The sentence says, "protects . . . in the way a Parma Magica protects . . ." It doesn't say AotH is activated in the same way Parma is or does not require vis like Parma. Your examples are meaningless. If you want to ignore the sentence, then by all means do so, but that's your choice.
On the Berklist, David Chart has already admitted Wards and Aegis have problems, in that during playtesting everyone assumed that they worked they way they did in previous editions or how people thought they should work. There was no real discussion over the pros and cons of penetration versus no penetration during playtest. It wasn't until ArM5 was out a year that the topic was really discussed. There have been a lot of proposals on how to "fix" wards/AotH. Richard's is one way. Many, many people disagree with him. I am one.
If I recall correctly there are three basic proposals:
Use current spell guidelines, level of effect is based on level of Might of creature to be blocked and spell must penetrate. (RAW - according to Line Editor)
Use current spell guidelines, level of effect is based on level of Might of creature to be blocked and spell does not need to penetrate. (AotH = Parma Magica)
Use new lower base, fixed guideline, not tied to Might of creature, and spell must penetrate.
If you use method #1, Might counts twice. You need to cast a level 25 spell to keep out a 25 Might creature and Penetrate by 25. If the Might of the creature sets the level of the spell, you shouldn't have to penetrate too is the argument against it.
The easiest fix is #2, where you treat an Aegis like Parma for the covenant. The problem with this is that it's too easy to make Wards that let a magi hide and stop the story going forward, some say. Wards are very powerful then. As a Storyguide, wards don't scare me. There are lots of ways to force a character out of them, but even I, a proponent of very strong wards, only apply the Parma style rules to Circle/Ritual wards.
The best solution in my opinion is the hardest to implement. It requires making the AotH spell (and Wards) a fixed level, base 1, 5, 10, 15, or whatever, get your casting total, and record the Penetration for the spell. If the AotH penetrates, the Might-y creature and its magic cannot get in. Reduce all foreign spell casting totals by half the penetration total or whatever.
Anyway, as David Chart has stated, the issues with AotH and Wards are too big for simple errata and any fix requires a new edition or ArM5 RE. I think fixed levels and penetration are the way to go in the future, but we'll see after several rounds of playtest.
In any event, as for the RAW, as explained by the Line Editor, AotH and Wards are spells like any other spells and have to penetrate. Even if that seems stupid to many, many people and makes Wards and AotH basically a waste of time and protection against only the weaniest of creatures.
In regards to the Aegis of the Hearth, the rules actually do not indicate that it is except from Penetration, other than that Penetration for Wards is mentioned nowhere in the core RAW. If it was, then there wouldn’t be the need to mention it again and again every time the subject of Wards is mentioned in a sourcebook. In fact, p. 114 of ArM5 seems to indicate that, if anything, Wards are to be treated with special rules altogether. Under the heading of Magical Wards…
Now, on the surface this seems to imply that I am worried about Penetrating the resistance of the thing protected, which is the Target of the spell; not against the subject warded against. But instead, what this quote actually turns out to indicate is the fact that you cannot use Arcane Connections to help boost Ward Penetration, because the thing you are trying to protect yourself from (and need to Penetrate) is not the ghost bearing down upon you. You yourself are the Target.
Now, I happen to have the House Rule idea that is about to revolutionize everything. It is so good, I wouldn’t be surprised if it eventually made its way into the game (1xp in Hubris ).
It is all about matching Realm and Form. As things stand, including the Penetration rule, Wards are balanced lopsided in favor of Vim. A Vim Ward can cover a whole Realm, regardless of Form. All other Forms can only Ward against that Form, and it still must be Realm specific.
My proposed HR is that the Ward Penetration rule as it exists applies when a Ward only matches one aspect, Realm or Form. Thus Vim can Ward against all Magical beings regardless of Form, and Mentem can Ward against all intelligent Spirits, regardless of Realm. However, if the Ward matches both Realm and Form, such as an Herbam Ward against Woodland Faeries or an Animal Ward against Magic Beasts, then do not subtract the Level from the Casting Total. All beings with a Might score have an inherent Flaw equivalent to Weak Magic Resistance (when faced with Wards that match both Realm and Form). This only applies to Might based resistance. If the subject has a second form of resistance, such as Parma Magica, it is not affected this way. Parma Magica is a superior form of Magic Resistance compared to Might.
Now, in some cases, a subject may e classified in more than one form (though only of a single Realm). For example, a Jinni counts as Mentem because it is an intelligent spirit, it also fits within the Form for the element it is attuned to (such as Auram for a Djinn or Aquam for a Marid), and all Jinn are covered by Ignem because they are composed of smokeless flame. Only one Form needs to match, such as Mentem or Ignem, combined with matching the Realm, triggers the weakness. Demons, though they can take many forms (Animal, Corpus, Mentem if disembodied), are always covered by Vim. As are Daimons. Thus, Rego Vim Wards are fully effective against such beings.
I am using a slight variation of this rule in my current saga. Only Colombae can Ward across Realm with a specific Form, and Personal Wards provide a Soak Bonus instead of repelling the warded subject. And you know what? It has yet to come up. Three months into this thing, not once has it ever come up. It is PbP, so it is only the equivalent of a month long regular game. But in the other game I play in, 5 months now, the issue of Wards and Penetration has yet to be an issue.
A lot of little things that we end up arguing and debating about. They just don’t occur as frequently as you may think. I am currently boycotting Wards with my character (except against Heat & Flames, but that’s different ). And I don’t miss them. If Penetration of the Aegis ever becomes an issue, then the SG really has run out of story ideas.
That’s me being smarmy again. I’m sorry. Look, if Aegis Penetration is an issue, then just presume that someone out there has invented Potent Spell versions of the Aegis, and it is now wide spread. Combined with Wizard’s Communion and as many other bonuses as are feasible, having a Penetration score equal to or greater than the level of the Aegis is believable for levels up into the 50’s. Durenmar, with its level 100 Aegis, is being cast by many powerful wizards, most likely squeezing every conceivable bonus out of everything they can, and probably then some. But they are Durenmar. That’s what they do.
Now that I think of it, a Casting Tablet (the usual method of casting an Aegis) can have a Penetration bonus built in. You can double the Casting Level on Tablet, with equal parts Aegis and Penetration. Using Wizard’s Communion, its only a matter of having enough magi, and you could feasible cast an Aegis of any level.
Marko, why do you dislike the favoring of Vim with regards to warding vs. creatures of might?
There are a multitude of different types of warding... but, given what Vim is, I think it is quite logical that it be better at doing that type of warding that other forms? To me that is one of the things Vim 'should' be better at than another form.
It is not that I dislike Vim, I just thing all other Wards are underpowered. Vim is a pretty important and comprehensive form already. Evening it out by making other wards just as powerful does not upset things. In fact, Vim is still preeminent because Vim counts as the specific Form for many creatures (such as Demons and Daimons). Rather than demoting Vim, I am elevating it along with other Wards so that it can pnetrate much eaisier if the Realm and Form both match. In almost all cases, it usually will. The cross-realm Form-Wards are only for the Colombae, but all magi can use Vim to create cross-form Realm-Wards. But, if Realm and Form both match the creature's might, then the HR is to not subtract the Level from the Casting total. Wards all fixed up!
For the Aegis, I consider it to encompass all forms and Realms, and thus has the same advantage agains all beings with a Might score.
Well, to me, the advantage of form-wards is that they cut across realms.
Thus, you'd have a Vim Ward against Magical beings, unable to affect, say, faeries, but an Ignem Ward against Fire Beasts, able to affect equally Fire Demons and Flame Angels.
Indeed. This is not the RAW in the core, but it is the implication of later books. The spirit magic rules in HoH:S and also in RoP:M state that the guidelines either summon or affect creatures of a given Form, independent of Realm, or a Realm independent of Form for Vim.
Thus, a caster might try to summon a fire spirit and have one of any Realm show up depending on circumstances. Naturally, I imagine that few Quaesitores will take ignorance of the infernal nature of your most recent summoning to be any defence. The Intellego guidelines in RoP:M also state that the spells don't detect demons, but I choose to interpret that as "don't reliably detect demons" because they can always choose to decieve Intellego spells if they so desire.
Either way, having Form spells cross Realm and Vim spells cross Form makes them balance nicely. It also makes sense, since when warding against fire, it seems a little silly to stop and ask it if it's infernal or divine fire first.
The only clear thing is that the rules are not widely appreciated. Everyone and his dog has hjis own HR here.
We applya system where personal/group etc wards give a soak bonus (+5 soak per magnitude, at personal/mom range and duration), and where only circle wards provide a 100% protection; these do not need to penetrate, only be equal or superior to the creature's Might.
So yes, for us circle wards are very powerful, but plenty of sneaky ways to force the magi and their companions out. The later is a question of simple roleplay.
We are not talking about RAW here, just House Rule ideas. I am saying Ward Penetration would be more fair if Forms did cut accross Realm, and my HR is that if the Ward matches both Realm AND Form, then do not subtract Level from Casting Total.
True - what we seem to have here is multiple supplements and authors disagreeing as to their vision of the rules. For myself, I don't much like the HoH:S rules for wards because I don't like their flavour. It seems right to me that a fire mage should be able stand whilst dragon fire and a demon alike bounce burning from his wards. Likewise, a ward against demons should stand against everything from an infernal rat to a fallen seraph.
And it seems silly to me that it's easier to use ReCo to bind a faerie lord into a circle by commanding him not to move than by making a ward. (Ward against the Curious Scullion, ReCo10, Covenants p104). That can bind any humanoid faerie (albiet without preventing from attacking the ward itself but that's another comparitively easy spell) of Might 10 or more far more effectively than can any ward spell and can use arcane connections to aid it. Using the bones of a dragon's spawn to etch the circle should help me bind it, just as the entrails of his son bind Loki. I like the idea of the Columbae, but I feel that the author was too cautious in his approach and fit them to the letter of the RAW, rather than the spirit.
Agreed. Warding is going to be a problem area for a long time, I get the feeling, but I think your vision is relatively close to my own. Personally I'm in the 'fixed guideline' camp for the ultimate fix, but how/where to set that guideline I'm not certain. I do however think it should be fairly standardized like the hermetic summoning/spirit magic, a cross-form guideline with it's efficacy based on the rest of the spell's parameters and penetration.
I'm also not sure I agree with the view that circle wards should be so substantively better than all others... though I can see why people might feel that way.
Basically I think the magic system should be consistent and uniform cross-form and regardless of individual effect. A given spell range/target/duration, aside from the obvious intrinsic differences there, should not be different mechanically based on what effect it is used with. Circle spells should all function the same. If you want circle magic, all of it, to be more powerful than other magic... I could see that argument. Applying this ruling to only the circle use of warding seems rather arbitrary and 'band-aid' like to me.
).
). And I don’t miss them. If Penetration of the Aegis ever becomes an issue, then the SG really has run out of story ideas.
