Yeah.. I definitely prefer the idea of making each virtue or flaw being roughly equivalent is better. You don't get 'poor vision' as a flaw anymore, that's represented by a low perception. Instead you get blind as a flaw.
I agree with those posters who have already suggested one of the big things ArM needs is a visual refresh and new graphic design. As a Paizo employee, I have really come to understand how key graphic design is to readability, enjoyment, and marketing. For my Arthur Lives! RPG, which was for Fate Core, I hired a professional with a long list of successful RPG credits, and let me tell you, it was the best decision I ever made. Atlas knows how to do this; Over the Edge, Unknown Armies... these games look amazing.
I agree that combat needs to be redone, but this is not controversial, as every edition of Ars has had a different combat system. I like the idea of separating success from "good twists" and "bad twists", as seen in the OTE RPG, so that a hero can hit and do damage but still have something bad happen, or a hero can miss, but still get something good. I find the current system, frankly, dull, and my best fix for it is to give everyone 5 wound levels like in previous editions so that combat is at least short.
I do not agree with the idea that every magus needs a list of virtues and flaws: everyone gets a focus, for example. I like to play generalists. I don't always WANT a focus and I don't think forcing everyone to take one is a net positive. I would like more Major Hermetic Virtues, though, and I'd like all of them to be as good as Flexible Formulaic Magic, Flawless Caster, Mythic Blood and the Gentle Gift.
I do not agree with the idea that every non-Hermetic NPC should use Hermetic guidelines for everything. The fact that folk witches, rune wizards, and diabolists all do things differently is a huge PITA for a GM, but it also means the players don't know what to expect and it's easy for non-Hermetics to have capabilities Hermetics don't.
I would like to see a starter set for ArM which includes pregens but also simplified rules for making your own characters and advancing them a little, say to about age 35. Include a clear starting setting, in Provence, with a starter covenant, a color map of the region packed with plot hooks and a map of Mythic Europe on the other side that sells this game.
I agree with the voices who called for more player aids. Why we do not have spell card decks for Ars Magica is a question I cannot answer. My players would be so happy to have those. Give me tokens to use for vis (I know we have fan made ones, but).
I would like to see some changes to the rules. For example, I miss the rule from previous editions that allowed magi to expend vis to make a temporary effect Creo or Muto permanent, while the spell is cast. I like this rule so much that I have simply adopted it.
And finally, I would like this conversation to continue. I trust Atlas to make good decisions, but I want them to be informed by a LOT of fan input.
9 Likes
That sounds exciting. However it would be a pain to try and write a tribunal with Hermetic politics, if all the houses have 3 different variations, because they interact differently with each other in different combin ations. Or writing adventures, if the main antagonist's concept isn't firmly defined
I think the Houses do need one official version. But if they had supplemental notes for how the house would work if one or more things were different, that could work. All books would then have to have inserts mentioning things like "If House XX is instead such and such then so and so is different"
Fix animals!!! Animals are a mess. There are so many ways to make them. Supernatural beings in general could be streamlined to one essential system. But animals are far worse.
First, Virtues and Flaws should not be used to define animals at all. Those were originally there to distinguish individuals from other individuals of the same type (like humans from humans). Keep them that way.
Animal Qualities were designed to distinguish animal traits. Expand them some and use them exclusively for this. That makes shape shifting easier, as you just pick up the mundane Qualities of the new form. If this is is also used for supernatural animals, then it makes it clearer what happens if you shape shift into the shape of a drake, for instance. Include Size alteration here, and suddenly all the weird stuff with different Sizes and shape shifting works. This also fixes all sorts of stuff for shape shifting the other direction (starting from an animal form, like familiars into humans). Use these mundane Qualities for animals made in Grogs, too, for consistency. All you have to do for balance is to rate the value of a Quality against the value of a Virtue.
It also gets rid of the whole ridiculousness of adding 7 points to the original numbers and then selecting Improved Characteristics some arbitrary number of times to get to the values you want. If they're all arbitrary, why force them into this odd set of mechanics? First, the 7 are not normally for the baseline, but beyond the baseline (look at humans). Second, why not just place points and ignore Improved Characteristics if that's what you're doing. Just stick everything in mundane Qualities.
Also, by separating out all this with mundane Qualities, it resets the baseline for everything's Characteristics to be 0. The Qualities sit on top of this. This is part of why shape shifting becomes simpler, but it also makes CrAn guidelines to improve Characteristics easier to understand.
Finally, this gets rid of using supernatural powers for mundane Qualities, which brings in all sorts off oddness like non-supernatural things theoretically needing to penetrate even though they theoretically don't need to penetrate.
As mentioned above, at the same time creation of supernatural beings could be set up with a single mechanic. The different realms can have some different access to things, but the mechanic can work the same way. And for different forms, you give them both supernatural Qualities and mundane Qualities. For example, a drake might have a mundane Quality giving it wings.
3 Likes
One of the things that has bugged some of the people I play with most is when Houses are made unattractive by severely limiting them. Lots of my friends hated what was done with House Bjornaer. Bjornaer went from favorite to detested because the description made the house seem nearly universally bigoted. I've personally also found it hard to make a Criamon that would really want to adventure with typical other magi, even though the house is so cool. And I've heard others complain about how locked-down the Criamon world view is now that they cannot make their own variants as easily. Just leave a little more flexibility in these houses; don't nail things down in ways that go against having them work with others well. Maybe some sects, clutches, etc. don't play well with others, but make sure a bunch can. We want a game where people can choose what they want and still be able to be part of the group.
3 Likes
On that subject: I really enjoy House Tremere's write-up for 5th edition. A 'for the greater good' ethic is exactly what the House needs to overcome its generally unattractive authoritarian side, and to open up a wider range of character options. But giving up a minor magical focus? Ouch!
5 Likes
"House Tremere: Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons since 848 AD!" It's a great, easy-to-grasp concept. I love the Tremere rewrite.
But this does bring up a more thorny issue: the rights to the names "Tremere" and "Order of Hermes". I really begrudge having to pay money for the rights to these things, but changing the names is problematic. Authors for the line have suggested the Order of Mercury; in my own "Ars Magica 2220" science fantasy setting, the Order has been recreated as the Order of Thoth. I guess maybe we should just pull the bandage off; if the game is relaunched in a 6th edition, there will be so many differences that losing these two names may not seem that significant.
2 Likes
No name changing. I am not sure if White Wolf has a lock down on those words any more. They went broke and were bought out by some company (in Sweden I think). Onyx Path has a license or some such to write and publish material on their behalf. A number of guys who worked at WW are now (or were) over at Onyx (such as Satyros Phil Brucato).
I bring that up because I have noticed than in Mage20, there is no longer a statement about Atlas games owning the trademarks to Flambeau, Tytalus, etcetera. So, I don't know if there has been a change in the agreement or what. On top of that, just about anyone is free to self publish WoD material. I am looking into writing an Order of Hermes book for that, and I checked with them about what words I can and cannot use.
So I am really not sure if that is an issue or not. But I will tell you this. Take away my Order of Hermes and I will jump ship to Mage. Over there, Flambeau was still Iberian.
I'm wondering if copyright issues are why 5th edition was brought to an end when it was.
Pay attention to the man behind the curtain. David Chart wanted to move on and do other things with his life. He felt that he had accomplished establishing a new vision, which is true, and said that to go further would require pushing into a new edition.
And fifth edition ran for a course of over a dozen years. More than twice as long as any previous edition, and outlasting edition shifts in many other games.
Atlas as a whole, as far as I can tell, Atlas seems to be strong and healthy for a span of over twenty years. It is White Wolf that went bankrupt. Mage 20 is published by Onyx Path. Maybe they have a different deal, or no deal. It has been 25 years since the WW "divorce". I am not even sure if you can Trademark some of these words. Google the word "Flambeau"and you will find a number of different companies and locations (one specifically is a lighting company, and another is a lake not to far from where I live now). Vis? Regio? Custos? Certamen? Those are all terms both games use and neither posts a trademark notice.
Back to my EXTREME aversion to name changes, I just want to point outthat I started with Mage in the early 90's and migrated to Ars Magica 4 because I thought the Order of Hermes was awesome. Take that away, where does that leave me?
Names are important. Words have power. These are fundamentals of Hermeticism.
2 Likes
I am reading the indica on M20, and it seems they no longer make claim to Order of Hermes or Tremere. White Wolf is defunct. It is now itself a trademark name, and is owned by CCP. It seems that they only lay claim to things published since the buyout.
Ā© 2015 CCP hf. All rights reserved. Reproduction without the written permission of the publisher is expressly forbidden, except for the purposes of reviews, and for blank character sheets, which may be reproduced for personal use only. White Wolf, Vampire, World of Darkness, Vampire the Masquerade, and Mage the Ascension are registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights reserved. Vampire the Requiem, Werewolf the Apocalypse, Werewolf the Forsaken, Mage the Awakening, Promethean the Created, Changeling the Lost, Hunter the Vigil, Geist the Sin-Eaters, V20 Companion, Children of the Revolution, Storyteller System, and Storytelling System are trademarks of CCP hf.
Hi,
I suspect that my own opinions about this topic will be unpopular, but here goes.
Overall, I think a 6th edition should take the few fundamental ideas that are necessary for a game to be Ars Magica, discard the others even if they are sacred cows, and utterly redesign the system.
-
Wizards are awesome and diverse, and everyone gets to play one.
-
Small groups of wizards live together with their dependents, servants and vassals. The players are one such group of wizards.
-
Wizards are part of a much larger magical society spanning all of Christendom and possibly beyond that requires the membership of any wizard worthy of the name. That society has subgroups based upon interests, location and wizardly tradition.
-
The game features a great magic system that is able to express any spell appropriate to the setting, allowing spells that are designed on the fly during play and including magic items.
-
The core setting is Europe that is at least superficially historically accurate up until the start of the game.
-
The core setting allows for the existence of supernatural beings appropriate to the mythology and folklore of Europe, but these have not yet managed to alter the overall historicity of Europe.
I don't think I'm missing anything important here.
Perdo isn't important: If the magic system lets us design all the cool effects and support many different kinds of wizard, we can perhaps live without pink dots, the subtle distinctions of Perdo, what "very unnatural Aquam" really is, und so weiter.
The Code of Hermes is not important: I suppose our society of wizards needs a name, and Order of Hermes will make a lot of people happy. But naming it for Merlin or Vergil or whoever works too, though not Vectron. Societies have rules, so I suppose we need a code, but maybe not the Code. By changing what is and is not allowed we get new kinds of story. Maybe involvement in the mundane world is expected. Maybe Ex Misc wizards (if this is retained) do not get to have a vote or get full rights, but an Ex Misc of sufficient power and renown can found a new House. Maybe.
The combat system... giggle.
The eight characteristics are worse than not important.
The 12 Houses that we have are less important than one might think: We probably want to keep much of what we have. Probably. But maybe we want more than 12. Maybe we want to have major and minor traditions. And I should note that since we now have two different Criamons, three different Tremeres, at least two different Flambeaus, two different Bjornaers, we must either make room for all these new traditions or kill someone's sacred cow. Maybe there's even room for something new. And if you want pagan wizards, maybe a Baltic tradition work better than the long-dead druids?
The Tribunals that we have are not important: The more I think about it, the sillier the Tribunal system seems. For example, fifty years to resolve Tribunal conflicts? Really?
The whole Gentle/Blatant Gift thing is not important, kind of like the henchmen rules in AD&D.
I have some other preferences.
For example, although I usually favor low-crunch systems, I unfortunately think that AM needs a high crunch system, because players choose AM partly to do clever things with magic, and it's hard to be clever to the extent the legality of an effect boils down to the GM reaching out with the Force to feel whether it belongs.
Anyway,
Ken
3 Likes
No need to wait for a new version of Ars, if you have ideas for this. You could just write an article for Sub Rosa or Peripheral Code. Such a tradition could have been coopted into either Ex Misc, Bjornaer, Merinita or even Tremere and enhance many sagas.
1 Like
The church is significantly bigger and more powerful (well, temporally) than the order of Hermes, and stuff can take a while to play out. Especially doctrinal issues. I mean in 1220 I think there have only been 12 ecumenical councils.
This I largely agree with. I think the key is to figure out what the essential complexity is and get rid of the rest. This is something I've been thinking about a lot. People definitely want the flexibility they have now, to be able to realize a vast diversity of Magi and companions. My thinking ATM is that the non-essential complexity lies in the vast and non-uniform skill system.
Also, while I like the code a lot, it'd be cool to have a book that changes various parts and then sort of plays out likely changes in history and in mythic Europe, 1220.
Did you check out Transforming Mythic Europe (abbreviated TME)? Would that be what you expect - considering that changing the Code of Hermes likely would affect Mythic Europe too?
1 Like
It's on the list but haven't read it. I'll bump it up!
Speaking of the 12 Houses, these have undergone some changes across editions.
Imentioned earleir that I dislike the too-wel defined 5th ed Criamon.
I know House Flambeau is a sore point. I for one find the current version refreshing, it gives theHouse designed for combat an air of knightly dignity. I have experienced many oppinions that earlier versions were viewed as "crazed fire-psychopaths", and therefore the new versions seems "better" for some.
I have had only cursory experience with 3rd ed, and quite frankly can't remember them in detail from 4th ed. I migth have to go back and read up on it. But my recollection covers both Flambeau oppinions like: "Faeries? Burn them!" and Flambeau meetings described as "a guild of assassins discussing the pros and cons of the battleaxe versus the poisoned dagger". I think Houses like this need to cover a broader ground to include both the wild and the disciplined fighters.
House Bjornaer has also gotten some flak. I find the 5th ed version very interesting and cool, but the very structure of Septs, which is cool, and Mystery Cults in general for that matter, are also difficult to run in practice. Unless you have several Bjornaer PCs, or a Troupe willing to run NPCs for the benefit of the Bjornaer magus' player. With the secrecy of MCs it can be difficult to run stories fore the entire Troupe, at least nor for other player magi. Otherwise the entire structure becomes a minor backdrop thing, between only player and SG.
House Merinita...I like the original nature-oriented form, and dislike how the faeries have taken over. I know it may be a cool story, but the original tradition is gone, or at least a minority suffering from unwanted mandatory faerie affiliation. I'd like the True Merinita to exist as a sub-tradition. Or to spin a background story that the House recently underwent a revolution, where the minority of original Merinita broke off and eventually drew in other like-minded magi, perhaps whole Ex Misc traditions, perhaps descendants of those who left when Quandalon took over. And now they are two Houses. I realize this would make 13 Houses, and I feel this may not be popular. In which case the two should just co-exist under the Merinita umbrella, like Bonisagus has the Trianoma faction, but perhaps less amiable.
Now House Jerbiton, I really like how they were changed from "interested in mundane affairs" (or perhaps just interpreted like than, in 4th ed) to a broader scope. And I really like the way the fall of Constantinople affected some of them.
2 Likes
Seconded. But then, I have a multipage document detailing exactly what I'd want in that 5.5 edition 
I strongly disagree. I want each new tradition to be as mechanically unique as possible!
Few things are as boring as something new that's just a limited version of something old with the serial numbers filed off. It's quicker and easier, sure. But much less interesting!
Again. I disagree. Not all paths should be identical.
2 Likes
Maybe there's a reason for this? Maybe because neither of these particularly fit the aestethics of 13th century Europe? I understand that the current climate is that everyone should be able to make every
character they can think of. But that's a very modern (and silly) idea.
There's much to be said for limitations when designing games.
1 Like
Nothing!
Which is why I won't be involved in 6th edition, at least not until a clear new vision is properly bedded down.
(Well, obviously, the combat system should be completely rewritten, because that's traditional, but apart from that.)
10 Likes