Keep in mind that this is all fiction' so the answer is really just whatever you and your fellow players desire. I ran an epic style arena battle once, the war was agreed upon to take place within the boundary of some ancient ruin. It was simple, direct, easy to run, and made for a fun night of gaming. The PC won, showed mercy by merely cutting of the opponents hand and breaking his talisman sword, and earned the respect of the other magi.
The issue being is that someone who declares WW on you has likely been doing all of the prepwork described in this thread for the past season or three. As such, the declarer of WW has a MASSIVE advantage in their ability to front-load the hurt on you. Best response? Don't be there. Let all of the atomic smack-downs that they've set up fizzle out due to you being out of range (ie, in another dimension - whether it be the Twilight Realm, or simply another regio), while you spend the next month planning your own strategies. From the time WW is declared to when it starts (1 month), to the duration of the WW (1 month), to the time the next one can start (1 month) is a season - you should be able to get something set up by then, even if you're in an alternate dimension for part of that time. (assuming you've got a decent lab wherever you're going, of course.)
While it is often the case that a magus declaring Wizard War (the "attacker") has been preparing extensively for it, and that the other party (the "defender") is caught relatively unawares, neither is necessarily the case. For example, the attacker might act on a sudden impulse (e.g. when goaded into it by clever provocation), or might be forced to act quickly by a sudden turn of circumstances (say, your beloved apprentice is bonisnatched to be sacrificed to some forgotten god the next solstice). Similarly, the defender might have long known or suspected Wizard War to be coming (from spies, good character reading etc.) or might have actively incited it.
At the same time, fleeing is not necessarily always the best response even if caught relatively unawares. There may be a crucial vote coming up at the next Tribunal that you don't want to miss, or some irreplaceable item you can't carry with you and which you would effectively forfeit by fleeing. In these cases, bunkering up behind your covenant's and sodales' defenses might be a good option, as might be calling upon allies to attack your enemy (note that while Hermetic allies will need to declare Wizard War themselves, that's not the case for powerful hedge wizards, faerie gods, holy men, dragons etc. - and even Hermetic magi can find ways to harass an opponent without breaking the Code or declaring Wizard War).
Yes. Which is why I said "default strategy" in my original post, as opposed to "only strategy". 
I'd still argue that avoidance + carefully planned counterattack (if necessary) is the best idea, simply using basic military principles (the best defense is to be untouchable - either physically or politically). But if you don't have time to do that, or for whatever reason you can't do that, then yes. You'll have to do something else.
Or, yes - if you already have some good default strategies built up for Wizard's War, or if you've suspected that you might be the target (and have been collecting Arcane Connections/sympathetic bonuses), then you can go ahead and implement them. But as the Intangible Assassin chapter points out - most wizards aren't prepared for War. That's an entire branch of magic that is pretty much untouched by a vast majority of the Order.
You know, part of the reason I have difficulty wrapping my head around some of these responses is that I always play Flambeau magi. Nothing else interests or entertains me, except for maybe Tytalus. Either way, violence is something I expect and something I am prepared for. I remember more than once advocating WW as the solution to a troublesome enemy. The others quiver and bemoan "oh no, he is too powerful and experienced" and they are shocked at how unafraid and unconcerned I am. I get talked out of it, not because of actual character concerns, but because other players whine and complain.
I sympathize with both sides there, although unless it would've damaged your relationship with the group I'd have gone ahead with declaring War since you didn't have an IC reason not to.
On the one hand, War makes for strategic and possibly exciting gameplay, and tends to have a high risk:reward ratio. Plus, it can potentially lead into stories about the political aftershock of your opponent dying in War, though that's not a requirement if that bores the troupe
On the other hand, declaring War is pretty much the only action you can take (aside from not putting up the Parma Magica or any defensive spells and running around attacking everyone at Grand Tribunal with lethal magic) that tells the SG they can take the kiddy gloves off. Ars Magica is primarily about the narrative, so unlike other games, players come in with a general expectation that, until age or Twilight do them part, their magi will be with them from beginning to end. Physically declaring War (especially against supposedly powerful enemies) is a message to the SG that you're stepping up to their level, so if it's legit in terms of how it happens and seems like it enhances the story go ahead and off your character. On top of that... For the most part, War stories focus on the one who declared War, don't do very well at involving other characters except as collateral/meatshields, and vastly reduce the number of interesting stories that enemy might bring to the table.
Honestly, though, it's your character. If they don't mind the point about potentially reduced number of stories, they shouldn't argue against you going and getting your character killed, IMO.
That is another area I face differences in. I am unfamiliar with the mellodrama style that others seem to expect. I like stories of high adventure and mysterious discovery. Stories about building the library or politics bore me, unless they somehow involve a good fight scene.
And I doubt I would loose WW :mrgreen:
There is another way to look at WW. Metagame. If the SG is the antagonist, then one may expect that there is an in-game based solution. If the player is the antagonist, he will likely catch the SG by surprise. But the real key is the group dynamic. It is all fiction. So the question is "what sort and style of conflict, played out in which way with what results, would bring the most satisfaction and entertainment to the group?", and that is what limits you. So if the troupe as a whole will be disatisfied, and you are beligerant anyway, expect a smackdown. If it is an intended part of the story, expect to find a solution.
1 Like
Well, I don't know if I'd call it melodrama, because I do like my high-risk, suspenseful situations quite a bit, and of course adventure and mysterious discoveries are among my favorite parts of gameplay. I mean, yeah, in and of itself, funding a library-building project isn't exactly exciting. On the other hand, I certainly don't focus on combat in my sagas either, and I don't see the appeal in it. For me, fights in Ars Magica are one of two things, or sometimes both at once: stage-setters for longer and more involved stories branching off from the consequences of the fight, or high-tension climaxes to story arcs that otherwise involved things other than fighting (which might still have been tense, nerve-wracking, and/or dangerous). I don't see combat in Ars Magica as something you do four times per session while crawling dungeons, or honestly even as a solution to problems when there are other viable options on the table. (Of course, viability has its limits; it isn't viable to try negotiating a peace settlement between a demon and a crusader, for example) The main reason for this is that combat in Ars Magica, especially employing mundane methods, isn't particularly interesting in and of itself, not to mention in-character concerns like how much time and money you'll waste healing up and the chance that you won't even get an opportunity to do said healing.
Don't get me wrong, Ars Magica combat CAN be interesting, in short bursts over long periods, with generous use of descriptive language and maybe tossing in some special boss battle cinematic rules to make things feel more dramatic and influenced by personal creativity (I believe the Core rules mention doing this somewhere). In essence, though, there is no tactical thought going into a fight in Ars Magica, especially not a fight between mundanes. Ars Magica fights are pretty much just numbers; inflict more and bigger wounds, choose a spell that penetrates his MR, find [strike]an excuse[/strike] a good reason for your given TeFo to fast-cast defend against a given attack, what have you. Ars Magica really isn't about combat, and basically expects lots of embellishment to make things cool, without providing rules for meaningful tactical engagement. Ars Magica doesn't have you lining foes up for a charge, setting up flanks to get tactical advantages, grouping enemies and to hit them with AoE spells, setting up traps and ambushes, deciding when to feint, or utilizing the environment in any way. Those things might be happening, but it's descriptive in nature, and a lot of those things are just assumed to be happening over the course of the fight with little mechanical bearing or active decision-making on the part of the player. At most, the SG tells you to roll to beat a few Ease Factors, and your side gets a mechanical advantage because the dragon was pinned down. Now go roll dice at each other, minions, you're assumed to be "engaged." (Which I assume is a unit of distance somewhere between "actively being hit" and "out of striking range")
So, yeah. If I were going to play a game where combat was a primary problem-solver, I probably wouldn't be playing Ars Magica. Your Saga Obviously Varies.
The mistaken thinking that Ars combat has no tactical thought is the reason why, as a PC, I win almost every battle. It is also the reason why, as SG, I have to put on the kid gloves. There is a lot of tactical nuance that you are overlooking. If you want more tactical nuance, I suggest you get a copy of Lords of Men. Add in magic as a factor, tactics become even more complicated.
1 Like
Tactics shouldn't matter in Ars Magica combat. If you are asking an SG to describe the scene so that you can take advantage of tactics, or you, as an SG are designing a scenario to have some tactical elements in it, then I think you are doing it against the narrative nature of the game. For example, my character in the HBO Ars Magica saga was staring down an Arc of Fiery Ribbons with an MR of 0 and the spell had positive penetration (I think it was a botch, but I'm not certain about the details). I managed to soak the damage by double exploding. The SG described it as my character calmly stepping behind a rock. I'm pretty sure that rock didn't exist until the SG placed it there as the rationale for me soaking the damage. That's narrative, and not tactics. If you try and put tactics into Ars you're going to make combat even more deadly.
Your saga, and your experiences, will certainly vary. But it has worked well for me, and I have run a successful saga for quite a long time. I also don't see how Ars is any more or less narative than any other table top RPG.
Marko, by your very own words you have to put on kid gloves with respect to PCs. There's a disconnect going on, and it's not my saga and my experiences, it is your saga and your experiences. You are going to run the game you are going to run. If the players aren't playing the game the way you want it played, you have to adjust. You are saying that your adjustment is to take it easy on them. Isn't that changing the narrative?
It means that I scale encounters to the capabilities of the players. Not the characters, the players. And it isn't just combat, it is in everything. And I have different players at different levels of capability. As for "kid gloves", that has taken various forms that are set ahead of time. Sending a heavy hitter alongside the party when facing the dragon in case the one magus that can easily take it down panics. Having a political advisor on hand to guide characters towards solutions when they fail to see them. Feeding characters clues to the mystery that has them stumped.
All RPG's are narrative. I have used these techniques and many others in Ars Maguca, AD&D, Shadow Punk and Cyber Run, and many more. And it isn't changing the narrative if I had placed these Easter eggs ahead of time just in case they are needed. Also, my current crop of players has grown to be more experienced, both in this saga and other RPG's. And again, I insist that all RPG's are essentially the same, none are more or less narrative than any other in my experience.
As for martial tactics, I have more than one player that is highly competent. They remember to spend Fatigue for the bonus in the initial round of combat. They remember to set up a default list of defensive spells before entering a situation. They remember to use Arcane Connections for Penetration. The current group is much more capable than groups I have had in the past, which makes life as an SG so much easier.
This is not a debate I want to have. Let us just agree that I am right and move along :mrgreen:
Just being smarmy. There is no right and wrong as long as everyone is having fun. It is all fiction.
So let us migrate back towards discussing good tactics and strategies for Wizard Wars.
And I still hate mellodrama stories and sagas that are to artsy storytelly for their own good. This has limited me to mainly being the SG, a role that I seem to do exceedingly well with. As a player, I tend to break the boundaries of a narrow narrative and frustrate some SG's You may recall your experiences being frustrated with me playing in your game. The fault may be in you or in me. Maybe both, for we are both only human.
1 Like
Hey, depending on how you do it, breaking boundaries can be great for a narrative. If the plot for a game is already decided, then it's already bad. 
But yes, I suppose we should put this discussion down to talk about the actual topic. ("But isn't Lords of Men-") Be quiet, me.
An additional thing to note is scrying and opening fire allows one to use spell mastery to punch through nearly any spell resistance. It might take 10,000 (about a day of work) tries on average, but that's an easy way to get +80 penetration. There is very little one can do to defend against a magus with spells for taking out another magus after they have an arcane connection.
Also if you are going to play a defensive magus simply neglect to include a way to get to your door without magic, and stay inside on the full/new moon. In fact, that's probably a pretty good policy anyway.
I think that invisibility (at least invisibility of the standing wizard) and a Mu Im appearance changing spell work together to change the nature of wizard's wars. If a magus wants to hide he can slip away and no one will be able to find him without an AC or some pretty powerful intellego magic.
The preparation that I think most magi would hope to make prior to wizard's war (although it isn't one that you could easily accomplish in a single month) is to master an arcane tunnel spell for magic resistance so, in order to get Opening the Intangible Tunnel to work on you, the attacker would need penetration equal to (your parma10)+(your vim2)+ (your aura*2), this might be a challenge for them even if they have a fixed arcane connection.
An enchanted device that detects arcane tunnel spells and has a linked trigger to either a high level unraveling the fabric of vim or some sort of unpleasant surprise to the parties on the other end (perhaps a perdo vim AC degrading spell) is certain to be a device that exists within the order and could probably be rented for an exorbitant price.
Neither of these preparations would defend a magus against a different sort of range AC attack. Protections against Opening the Intangible Tunnel won't help a bit against a range Arcane connection version of Incantation of Lightning
Stuff like this feels like "Wizard War 2" - ie, the next-generation of techniques after someone survives their first wizard's war - or alternately the name of a follow-up chapter to Intangible Assassin, which discusses the counters involved in that section.
Invisibility has featured so much in so many of our sagas, that we've recently purchased a labtext for Discern the Images of Truth and Falsehood at level 25, which should counter the most common forms of invisibility.
So yeah, I agree that invisibility would figure into Wizard's Wars, but does level 25 really qualify as "powerful intellego magic"?
This is an excellent precaution, and one that I can recommend for almost every magus.
A level 5 Tunnel does the trick, and 5 XPs. You don't have to be a specialist.
Much harder to do - or more expensive to purchase.
Comes very much in handy though.
Very true. But that spell would be of a frighteningly high level.
Interesting implication: for most magi, fixing an AC is a non-trivial task. Sure, you can pass it off to an apprentice, but it's still a good chunk of work for SOMEONE. So you have to specifically plan to do this as part of your strategy.
In contrast: for the tremere - they pass it off to the Leadworker, who probably has a few hours a week set aside to do just this.
Tentative (somewhat paranoid) conclusion: the Tremere, at the least, have AC's to every single Covenent a Tremere has visited, simply by virtue of them picking up a rock from the courtyard before they left.