Wards and penetration

[Marko_Markoko]

@mintroll

Now, I've only been playing Ars Magica for a month now... I'm a new SG, and I've been asking lots of little questions in my own thread.
But, your all wrong.

I admire your boldness of speech

@mintroll

So yeah, I think the pen / non-pen debate is interesting... but you've got to remember what you're arguing about - creatures with Might and how hard/easy it is to do things all based off one number.

You have a point. You percieve with such clarity that you make the rest of us seem blind! I jest you not. At one point in the debate I said that I can trace the ward problem to its source. It isn't the change in Penetration rules, because if you follow Penetration logic, it should have applied to 4th and earlier editions as well. You didn't always total out as high as the spells level, some times you fell short and had to spend Fatigue. The problem isn't even in the core magic rules either or storytelling style either, though that's all we have been debating.
The root of the problem, the fons et origio of the whole thing, goes back to the generic concept of a Might score (which edition introduced that? Was that always there?). Everything else has evolved, even much about animals and creatures, except the very thing that is at the core of their supernatural essence.
Much to meditate upon

[Stella_Umbra_bani_Ty (Stella Umbra bani Tytalus)]

@Fhtagn

@WolfOfCampscapel

Flat base level? So you will only ever need the apprenticeship ward your pater taught you one season against all demons imaginable? No thanks, not IMC.

At the risk of asking a silly question, have you ever needed a new Pilum of Fire since the apprentice level one your pater taught you?

Sodalis Fhtagn, actually yes. I call it The Ball of Abysmal Flame. Or I would need it, but my youngster maga isn't skilled enough to learn it yet.

The same goes to Wards - I am not skilled enough to learn better wards, but some of my companions have began developing better Warding spells than what they learned during apprenticeship.

For now we go with the official "Wards need to penetrate" ruling even though this debate swayed me quite a bit. I also believe that Wards should be easier to do than spells to eradicate the opponent with one shot but we'll try this out this way. I'll continue following the discussion in hopes that you guys find a good solution to this problem.

[Fhtagn]

@Stella Umbra bani Tytalus

@Fhtagn

@WolfOfCampscapel

Flat base level? So you will only ever need the apprenticeship ward your pater taught you one season against all demons imaginable? No thanks, not IMC.

At the risk of asking a silly question, have you ever needed a new Pilum of Fire since the apprentice level one your pater taught you?

Sodalis Fhtagn, actually yes. I call it The Ball of Abysmal Flame. Or I would need it, but my youngster maga isn't skilled enough to learn it yet.

The same goes to Wards - I am not skilled enough to learn better wards, but some of my companions have began developing better Warding spells than what they learned during apprenticeship.

And here it seems we differ in perception of Wards. To me, the difference between PoF and BoAF is that one is a bigger spell, creating a bigger, more damaging flame. A ward, on the other hand, is a single effect (Thou shalt not pass!). The penetration then describes the skill of the mage at warding out bigger and meaner foes. You need only one spell, for instance, to ward off pebbles and boulders alike. (And yes, I know WAHaF provides variable soak instead - I think that should be fixed as well - the three different warding systems need to be cleanly integrated.)

[Xavi]

A page per day in this thread. Good enough!!

@Marko Markoko

True, instead of recording Ward Strength as Level, it would be recorded as Penetration. Still, I think he dislikes the sliding variability of my version. You actually have to make a record instead of simply referring to your character sheet to find what level ward you know (as in classic style warding).

Yup that is it. I “like” classical stuff. If I ever go up to publish our combat system in Sub Rosa you’ll see that we even went so far as to encourage the concept of magi with staffs/wands and no armour.*

So yes, having to record the “level” (penetration) of the ward for every single ward when we only have a pair or 3 wards in the grimmores of our 4 combined mages seems a little bit excessive to us. We prefer fixed power wards, so we can handwave most of this stuff tright away. Bookkeeping is not our forte. A little bit weird considering 2 of us work with numbers/statistics 90% of the time at work, but hey.

Now, after this (almost) pointless rant: I am both flattered and surprised that my preference and that of the group of weirdos that game with me (and that can be considered to be almost human if you do not look too deeply into their eyes) is so highly regarded by the fellow board members, and that we seem to be somewhat stirring how wards should be!

In other words, feel free to ignore us as a benchmark of what should happen It is great that a middle ground is being searched, but if we have to be sacrificed, we will simply keep playing as we do now. We do that with 50 of the rules so no biggie for us

This thread is highly inspiring in any case, and I might end up presenting a post on how I would like MR to act, but in an other thread, to prevent messing too much with this one

@mintroll

Now, I've only been playing Ars Magica for a month now... I'm a new SG, and I've been asking lots of little questions in my own thread.

But, your all wrong.

LMAO!!! Great post entry, Mintroll! Made me jump up and pay attention all of a sudden, so consider your policy to have hit 100%. +1 XP for your Finesse Ability.

However, I can’t say I really like your idea here. Or maybe I didn’t understand it well. Would you care to put up an example?

The fact that might is a problem as it is is an other important stuff (and the fact that the penetration of supernatural beings tends to suck), but I somewhat like its simplicity. You have a pioint here, though. Kudos to you. This is the classical example of the new guy shaking the beliefs of the grognards around simply by reading what is plain in the text.

@Fruny

Hmmm... talking about splitting factors up.

(…)
That way you can have a demon trapped in a ward by a mighty magus who used a sucky ward, who would still be able to use the weakest (hence better-penetrating) powers to slowly corrupt nearby people.

Downside is that you get the worst of both worlds in terms of bookkeping.

Actually, I LOVE this concept, but the bookkeeping (as you rightfully pointed out) makes me want to cry.

Damn, too many good ideas. Too few can be adopted right away in our simplified system. Tinme for a faulty ward around a trapped demon if we get to use this one…. (it is magic, so no need to justify it right away… if the ward is non hermetic)

About POF & BOAF (or diverse levels of wards) I prefer to have diverse levels: one powerful enough to stop smurfs from picking up my underwear and an other that I would need to stop the Queen of Bright Winter from slaping my face with a frosty hand.

BTW: the smurfs would be roasted by both. The queen is likely to have a soak high enough that only a pentrating BOAF (or a triple/quadruple 1-damage-rolling PoF) can cause her a light wound. So there is a difference here.

Having ranted so far, I think that the 1 magnitud per 10 might is a good system. If It needs to penetrate or not is an othetr thing, but it seems really good as a concept.

Cheers,

Xavi

*= We like magi to look like that, without preventing them using swords and armour, that is. Basically, IMS staffs have a load of 0, and add +1 to finesse rolls (and the highest defensive ability of any weapon); we also require magi to make a fatigue roll of 3+ each time they cast a spell in combat (stressful situation)….. So, we go for the “classical mage” vision here. Not to everybody’s liking, but we have moved away from “lone tin can wizards” to “staff wielding spellcaster & friends”, that we prefer.

[mintroll]

@Xavi

@mintroll

Now, I've only been playing Ars Magica for a month now... I'm a new SG, and I've been asking lots of little questions in my own thread.

But, your all wrong.

However, I can’t say I really like your idea here. Or maybe I didn’t understand it well. Would you care to put up an example?

I'm sort of writing my idea up a bit more clearly at the moment. But the premise is simple, give each creature a Might Score, Penetration Modifier and Resistance Modifier. So, here follows an overly long example (sorry, I should try be more terse)

You caste a ReAn Ward, of level 5 with a Casting Total of 9. So the Ward has Level 5 and Penetration 4 (lets say it's a circle for now). [ReAn.L5P4] (good notation?)

Lets have my Squirrel Maiden again,
Magic Might 5 (An):
Resistance Mod -5 An

Little Squirrel Maiden can't get through... the level 5 is sufficient to attempt to stop her, checking for penetration (Aside: I'm in the wards need to penetrate - simply to keep all the rules consistent), Her effective resistance is 5-5 = 0. Thus the ward penetrates and she cannot enter the ReAn Ward.

However, if you'd cast a more generic ReVi ward against magical creatures, again level 5 with CT 9. The level is sufficient still.... but now the maidens resistance is 5-0 = 5. So the wards penetration of 4 isn't enough - it does not penetrate, so she can enter the ReVi Ward.

Back to the ReAn ward... If another creature, a Unicorn comes along,
Magic Might 10 (An):
Resistance Mod -8 An

The same ward will not work. The level is not sufficient to keep it out.

Next creature wanders in, a magic bat (notice in this example, the modifier can be positive)
Magic Might 2 (An):
Resistance Mod +3 An

So, the ward is level 5, that's sufficient. Check for penetration, the Bats resistance is 2+3 = 5, the 4 is not good enough. So the spell does not penetrate... the Bat can enter the ward.

This idea allows for a magus to learn a ward at a fixed level... and keeps it useful since we can vary the amount of penetration required.

Along with the Penetration Bonus, we can now design creatures that are easy to affect... but can be dangerous. Or really powerful infernal creatures that can be easily kept at bay powerful Magus (for example, an Infernal Might 50 demon, with ResisMod -40 Ig: If you trap the demon in a fire ward of level 50, you need only a casting total of 61 to succeed).

Also, as another good thing... you can let your creatures become more powerful over time... without affecting their might.
For example, you trap the demon above... but it escapes. Knowing you can trap it... it learns to become ResisMod -25 Ig (magi can increase their parma - so extend this naturally to my idea). Many years later, it returns.... our original magus still has the level 50 ward (it's still useful - under current rules, you'd have to increase the Might Score, thus rendering the magus' ward spell useless)... he can still attempt to stop the demon, but now needs a much higher casting total to succeed, 50 + (50-25) + 1 = 76 (Level of Spell + (Might + Mod) + 1 (the plus one is require to exceed the resistance)). Something he may not realise until it's too late.

Or, how about this.
Infernal Might 5: Penetration +20, Resistance Mod +20 (All)
Now, this creature is hard to stop... very good at penetrating weak magi magical resistance, BUT it has a very low might pool... so can't do too much before it has to run away. (Contrast this with the 'in game power' of an Infernal Might 25 Creature)

Problems:

1. Yes, this will involve keeping track of the Level and Penetration of all wards (or more generally, long lasting spells)
2. There is probably a better way to write what I mean. I'm working on that.

Benefits:

1. Greater control over how powerful your creatures are. You can fine tune the might, penetration and resistance separately.
2. Apart from the book keeping mention above, there is little extra work.
   2b) You can adapt all currently published creatures by adding a single line to their stats.
3. I personally feel it is an elegant solution.

I shall continue to check this thread... but if people feel this is off topic then I shall move this to a new thread.

Also, without getting too big headed - should I email this idea to someone higher up the food chain?

[Marko_Markoko]

@mintroll

Also, without getting too big headed - should I email this idea to someone higher up the food chain?

LOL, don't worry. They are watching you. The thing I love most about Ars is that it is more of a food web than a food chain. The authors and even the illustrious line editor are all fellow members here on the Atlas Forums and over on the Berklist. We are all on the level here.

[Marko_Markoko]

I stumbled on a solution to the Ward contraversy. It struck me in th middle of the night during a dream. I was lost wandering on a path and ai opened a door...

Anyway, my thinking is that a Might Score in an inheritly inferior form of Magic Resistance. Parma Magica reigns supreme. In order to knock Might down a peg, I propose that all MR based on Might has the Major Flaw of Weak Magic Resistance. The weakness would be Wards of course.

That way you can have the best of both worlds. There is no secret MR loophole to worry about. You can use the old Warding rule, and if you want a specific being to be difficult to ward, then the have the Major Virtue of, well, "Difficult to Ward". You drop the aformentioned weakness and use the current Penetration rule.

Thoughts?

[Xavi]

You might be on to something here, Mark.... but I would apply it more restrictively to circle wards, free-moving wards that made you nuke-proof always seemed weird to me

Have to check my books before commenting further

Cheers,

Xavi

[Xavi]

I have been thinking about this and rised it to my buddies. And I have to say that we liked the idea. Since we are a bunch of heretics, we will not use it (it still forces you to record penetration) but the general conclusion was that it might put wards in their "right place" once again, making them powerful enough in the current setting and WITHOUT requiring a rewrite of any rules!

So yes, we like it. We think that this could be the way to go. As I said 2 of us still think it should be restricted to circle wards, though, while a third is undecided and the other (more munchkinish ) thinks that it should apply to ALL wards.

But we like the idea

Cheers,

Xavi

[Marko_Markoko]

I had forgotten how this Flaw was rewritten, but when I was checking out options for creating my character for the Novus Mare game (Roberto of Flambeau), I came accross it and was like "oh yeah!". I took it, because all it means as a Major Flaw is that, under certain conditions, your Parma works exactly as it did in older editions. Think about it. Technically Wards had to Penetrate in 4th and earlier editions, but no one ever bothered because (as Primus Davidius Chartius stated) back then, casting total x equaled penetration x, so you were always pretty spot on anyway.

Heck, I don't even use wards. I just think think ward penetration puts things outta proportion. So my next saga will have two Ward house rules 1) protective and entrapment wards are two separate effects, and 2) most beings who have a Magic Resistance based off of Might have the Flaw of Weak Magic Resistance (when faced with a Ward of their specific realm).

Then I can play with that to make some creatures harder to ward than others. Or better yet, an idea I have tinkered with before is favoring specific wards over general ones. For example, against the spell ReAnG Ward against Dragons and Serpents, Pan Caudrax has the Weak Magic Resistance. Against a generic ReVi that wards magic creatures, he does not suffer the flaw and may resist it easier.

But i am getting more complicated than I wanted. Just direct simple application of the Flaw, thats all I plan to do with it.

[The_Fixer]

@Marko Markoko

I came accross it and was like "oh yeah!". I took it, because all it means as a Major Flaw is that, under certain conditions, your Parma works exactly as it did in older editions.

Silly me, I never realized this, so focused was I on the "Oh no!! My parma!!!" aspect

[Jarkman]

@Marko Markoko

Anyway, my thinking is that a Might Score in an inheritly inferior form of Magic Resistance. Parma Magica reigns supreme. In order to knock Might down a peg, I propose that all MR based on Might has the Major Flaw of Weak Magic Resistance. The weakness would be Wards of course.

That way you can have the best of both worlds. There is no secret MR loophole to worry about. You can use the old Warding rule, and if you want a specific being to be difficult to ward, then the have the Major Virtue of, well, "Difficult to Ward". You drop the aformentioned weakness and use the current Penetration rule.

I like this idea (even though I'm not greatly perturbed by the Ward ruling in the RAW) - in effect if all Might based MR is subject to Wards (as they are specifically designed or whatever handwave), effectively if Hermetic Magi don't have this weakness due to Parma Magica then it maintains the flavour of Parma as a Breakthrough.

It seems easier to implement "Hermetic magi with parma have the benefit" rather than "all creatures with Might have an unstated Major Flaw" from a design/simplicity point of view.

Mind you this makes the role of Parma double:

1. it offers the only non-Divine, non-Infernal Universal Magic Resistance
2. it offers major protection against Wards

Regards,

Jarkman

[Henricus]

Hello, another newbie with an idea that could be nice:
Wards should be better when circular, right? so, why not give it form and material bonus (the circle and that with which it is made), something like: Circle/pentagram + 10 and material (for instance silver against lycanthropes, lead in general, iron filings against faeries, the like). I know these were thrown out, but it might be fun to put them back in for this specific instance.

This makes hastily drawn circular wards relatively weak (no material), and personal wards weaker than circular wards, but boosts the penetration of circular wards that a magus actually put time and effort in. It would also help flavour to have a magus lug around a small pouch of powdered red coral to ward out the most heinous demons (and only being able to do it once).

I am also firmly rooted in the camp that has a different spell for keeping out than from keeping in, maybe pentagram keeps in, and circle keeps out (and AC can be used to keep in, and even out, since you have a specific AC, when that thing comes around, the extra bookkeeping could be worth it)
It also would mean I would be in the penetration camp, though I do not know how I would deal with big wards, maybe some unholy thing like base 10 + 1/2 might, so you would need 15 to ward out 10, 20 to ward out 20, 30 to ward out 40, this offsets the huge bonus from circle, and still makes wards worth it

this is a major change from the RAW, but since those are read by several persons differently, might as well

By the way, I am a player, and I am someone who could be good at wards, but now I do not have them (first session just passed with this character, and my focus was on aegis and other things, cleanly forgot to take some wards)

[Henricus]

It just struck me when I was thinking about my talisman, when you have an opened talisman, your aegis could become a nuisance to keep track of, I could easily see something like

Aegis level 30, penetration 18, +5 vs unnatural beings, +10 vs demons, +7 vs faeries +5 vs lycanthropes

(this would be a silver cross with red coral stigmata and iron nails, which would be a logical combination)