That's an extra burden on the troupe, because one would have to consider what houses are compatible in a given saga. The authors can help on the way, but it is difficult to edit a clear text. The core rules have to be accessible to new players with new SGs.
2 Likes
I suppose that's true. But I think anyone smart enough to play Ars Magica is smart enough to figure that out. Perhaps the thing to do would be to have an introductory adventure, like Stormrider, which happens before the events of the big saga happen, with the Order as it has been.
Sure. I know we did, but it took more than twenty years to sort out such ambiguities. We could really have used more details and examples back in '95.
But more jump-start kits would be nice, and one could well make one for the Diedne theme with the necessary extra rules.
Yeah, I suppose that's something we could add to the list of things to change in a new edition: clearer presentation and easier to learn for new players. And more jumpstart kits would be a good part of that.
I still point people to 2nd as the easiest to learn, if they're new. I'm sure it's not intentional, or probably even conscious, but all the editions since feel like they're written with an assumption of previous knowledge of the game. And the original Stormrider: those briefing sheets explain things more clearly and succinctly than anything else.
I would also respectfully argue that the evil has been there from the beginning. Perhaps more developed and explicit in later editions, as all houses' identities have continued to be. Houses didn't appear yet in 1st edition, but 2nd edition Order of Hermes describes Tremere as primarily concerned with power, unforgiving, and has the story of their attempted domination of the Order and their dabbling with vampirism. Likewise the Tytalus preoccupation with violence and chaos, and their diabolism. Lust for power and domination for their own sake--that's evil. That's the Dark Side of the Force and the power of the One Ring.
2 Likes
Though, to be fair, the very first mention of them, the short paragraph in the 2e core book, only described them as sensible, stable, and organized. I don't know whether the conception changed between the core book and Order of Hermes, or whether it was just brevity. But if you like that conception of them and want to play them that way in your own saga as more of an Imperial Roman Army kind of thing, downplaying the rest of it, then there's absolutely no reason why you shouldn't.
I really like what they did with 5ed Tremere. They are no longer cartoon style villains.
They believe the order would be better if it was more structured, more ordered.There are compelling arguments about a structured order being of benefit to most of the order. Imagine what could be accomplished if the order worked together more.
Also, if the Order of Hermes was seriously attacked, Tremere will be there. They are fanatically loyal. in a harsh world, one needs people willing to defend their own.
Like anything, there is nuance. There's a fine line when if overstepped order becomes repression; patriotism becomes racism.
I think Tremere walk that line well.
I would love to see Tytalus eradicated, or at least a radical rewrite. Tytalus are tedious. It gives that players who wants to be a dick to other players an excuse. "It's how a Tytalus magi would behave!".
Yet, they depend on the goodwill of the other players not to evict the Tytalus magi from the covenant, when that is how most people would react when dealing with stereotypical Tytalus shenanigans.
4 Likes
I agree about the over-reliance on canon, and in many threads have written the "it's your saga, play how you want" line, however, the rule book history has a certain weight for many players.
I consider the Schism War, the founding of Ex miscellania, Tremere's failure to take over the order, Tytalus's dabbling in Diabolism are all history as it gives the SG a lot of control. Want to have Damhan-Allaidh resurrected through Dark sacrificial magic threaten the order, go for it. Diedne come back, great. Discover Merinita have betrayed the secrets of the Parma to multiple Fae and the order purge Merinita a lot like Diedne, awesome. A heap of story options.
While any people who have gamed for a long time know there's always the line about the rules being a guideline, consider any game you've played with an establish world in the core rule book. Players tend to use the established history in the book, for the first game at least.
Don't get me wrong, I love the Diedne resurgent story idea, however, I think it shouldn't be core due to how it limits the wold in to one dominant story.
4 Likes
Yes, that's true. To a degree, we're all playing in a sort of shared world, which is why we bother to talk about it here. And why many of us would like to see Diedne back and justice done "officially" in our shared imaginative space, rather than just in our own games. In addition to just having the well-developed information on them to hand.
This seems to be a frequent sentiment. Perhaps one option in the story could be that the trail actually leads to Tytalus, who slandered Diedne and framed Tremere for it.
I find a lot better story in the mystery of Diedne than there could ever be in some restoration. That is what Ars Magica is really good at. It is not all just vague and undefined, but deliberately ambiguous, leaving several explicit interpretations open. Playing a saga of the restoration of Diedne is going to be a lot more fun if nobody knows whether they were Good or Evil, or just erringly Human in the first place.
And if there is someone I would really to see justice for, it is not the Diedne but the hedge traditions Diedne tried to eradicate.
1 Like
Is Diedne any worse than the rest? The whole Order is guilty there. The whole "join us or die" thing--very bad show.
1 Like
It was a militaristic house. As far as I can tell, it was all that players don't like about Tremere, only larger ...
My point was, if you want to restore the ancient druid tradition, don't save Diedne ...
3 Likes
Hm, maybe there's something I missed. Where is that found? I'd like to take another look.
At least in 5th ed. check out the ex Misc chapter (history section) of HoH:S for more details on their treatment of druid-related or merely neighboring Hedge traditions. Also more info in Contested Isles, definitely, and Faith and Flame, I think. Unsure about where else their abusive behavior towards non-hermetics is or may be mentioned.
1 Like
Based on 5e - arguably, yes. According to The Contested Isle, Diedne carried out a 17 year pogrom to kill every Irish druid she could find after they refused to join her House - a few escaped into House Merinita or House Flambeau (where Diedne promptly declared Wizards War on them), but they essentially went extinct as a tradition.
According to HoH:S there was also a wider anti-pathy between the Diedne tradition and most of the other Ex-Misc traditions in the British Isles that went back before the founding of the Order (and means that it's by no means clear that the sigils that went missing with the Ex Misc Primus would have been cast in the Diedne's favour) - there were Ex Misc and Hedge Traditions (notably the Gruagachan) that joined in trying to kill them with enthusiam in the Schism War.
There are some rough equivalents for some of the other Houses, but they're arguably not quite on the same level. The things I can think of off the top of my head include:
- Flambeau's crusade against the sahir, which was more about revenge for his master and the belief that they were all demon summoners than "join" ever being an option
- Tremere and Trianoma wiping out the Hyperboreans - this was another entire tradition gone, but on rather smaller scale as it only took a single assault; and
- (Overlapping with the previous example), Tremere's invasion of Greece. This did kill an unspecified number of Greek wizards, but Tremere then seems to have accepted them joining the Jerbiton, rather than resorting to wizard's war to kill those who'd defied him as Diedne did in Ireland.
Overall, there's a consistent pattern of the Diedne being very insular - the hedge magi had to join her House, not just the Order, Diedne magi refused to help the rest of the Order in crises like the "Order of Odin" attacks in Ireland and France, they refused to accept Quesitorial investigation when accused of diabolism...
6 Likes
I reviewed the suggested texts, and see what you're talking about. They hadn't previously stood out to me amidst the general chaos and death of the founding and early years of the Order. It still doesn't strike me as particularly heinous, though unfortunate and regrettable as were many of the things done by the founders and other members of the Order.
As with everything associated with Diedne, there's really not enough information to form a reliable judgment. The word "pogrom" is pretty damning, but it may just be an unfortunate choice of wording. Looking at the context, the druids of Ireland are described as generally combative and contentious (in keeping with Celtic history), so it could be that House Diedne were militant and fanatical, or it could equally be that they really had no choice but to decisively defeat and more or less exterminate their enemies, for their own survival, which is often how empires begin in real history. I've never conquered an empire in real life, but anyone who's ever played a Total War or similar game knows the feeling: "Geez, just STOP already! No? Fine, if you won't have peace then extermination it is."
Insular--guilty. But a very good argument can be made that it was justified, given the anti-barbarian prejudice in the Order. Bjornaer likewise.
I think it's a matter of perception colored by sympathies: if you have an affinity to Tremere, you're likely to see Diedne in darker colors, and vice-versa. Very much as I, descendent of many generations of knights and crusaders, am unlikely to agree with a muslim about the crusades.
1 Like
And here's something I just came across, coincidentally: during the invasions of the Provencal Tribunal by vikings and rune wizards in the 9th century, Flambeau faulted Diedne for being too passive. Which argues for their insularity, perhaps, but against their militancy.
1 Like
Well, I do not have an affinity to Tremere. I don't like their militarist and authoritarian ways at all. If I did not know better, I could think that the enemy of an enemy must be a friend, but when I look closer, I see that Diedne has the same key features that makes me dislike Tremere.
OK. I have an affinity to the underdog, so in a battle to restore Diedne, I could side with Diedne, but seen from the Schism, Tremere was the underdog. Diedne was the largest and most combat worthy house in the Order. There was no way Tremere could win on their own. It took 8-10 houses and the ritual of Thoth to take the Diedne down.
A certain antipathy with Tremere does not mean that I do not want them in the game. I find their fascist way to make an interesting character in the fantasy. It would be interesting to play one, and it would be interesting to play out some of their plots. Same goes with Diedne.
So this is not at all about affinities to me. It is about ambiguity. It is not about the Good or Bad, but about Humanity with all its flaws and bad decisions. When I oppose a canon restoration of Diedne, it is not because I do not like Diedne, but because I like to doubt their merits. If they be restored, it would disambiguate too many existing matters concerning not only them but also Tremere and Guernicus, and it would take a lot of effort to create new ambiguities and avoid a poorer game.
5 Likes
It's probably fair to say I do have an affinity for the Tremere (I like order and structure, and find working in a hierarchy easier than something more freeform, as well as liking their co-operative nature and sense of duty), and that that is colouring my views when it comes to the rights and wrongs of the Schism War.
I generally dislikes takes that boil down to "it was all an evil Tremere plot to gain power", and also don't think there's a huge amount of support for it in the 5e material (although it's not ruled out either). In particular:
- What actual power did they gain? The House lost over half of its membership, and most of the spoils of the War went to the Flambeau and Tytalus
- The House has a long history of distrusting pagan gods and human sacrifice (pg 113 of HoH:TL), so them reacting badly to the accusations against the Diedne is consistent with this being a real issue for them
- The House today genuinely believes that the Diedne deserved death, and that they were serving the Order.
There are counterpoints it's possible to make to most of these arguments (just because you're plotting to seize power doesn't mean it'll go smoothly, it's possible that only a subset of the House was involved in the original plot and the modern day House doesn't know about it), but I generally prefer interpretations that fall into the category of "escalation caused by mutual suspicions and the paranoia that resulted from the Corruption of Tytalus" or "the Diedne really were up to something - human sacrifice probably, diabolism more questionable".
5e doesn't give us a definite answer on any of those, and I'd prefer it remain that way in the official material (certainly vs an explanation I don't like, but probably vs one of my preferred options as well). That said, a campaign on any one particular approach would be a perfectly valid target for material under the mooted Open Gaming License if the terms allow it.
2 Likes
Fair enough.
I tend to think similarly about if Diedne were guilty--then it was probably a small cabal within the house, and not the entire house.