Which Tribunal would you most like to see redone for 5th ed?

Which Tribunal would you like to see revised and reinvented for 5th ed first?

  • 1. Loch Leglean
  • 2. The Greater Alps
  • 3. Novgorod
  • 4. Iberia
  • 5. Rome
  • 6. The Levant
  • 7. Stonehenge

0 voters

Again just out of curiosity, given the popularity in the other poll of redoing Tribunal books for 5th ed, which would you like to see re-envisioned? Also, would you want the same covenants etc, or a complete "reboot" with only some elements remaining the same? Just one option this time -- which book would you like to see redone for 5th first?

My first pick would be Novgorod, followed by the Levant, although I'll admit the 3rd Edition books are probably the better ones to update first.

I don't have a strong opinion either way between preserving the previously covered covenants or starting fresh, although some fifth edition books do mention characters and covenants from the earlier books, which suggests some amount of preservation.

Rome, provided we are allowed to do it as a three volume set.

Seriously, there's no way to fit all of the potential goodness of Rome into a single book. This is not slanging off at Shannon by the way. He was writing before Google, in the 1187 setting (which really matters for Naples) and he'd been forced to tie in with Werewofl and use a theme of "All of the cool stuff is no longer cool because the world is dreary." (or "Corruption" or whatever it was.)

Just think for a minute: what would the chapter layout for a 75 000 word book on Rome look like?

Rome: God's Empire
Palermo: The Court of the Holy Roman Emporer, Arabic magicians.
Venice: the City of Hermetic Intrigue, how to make enemies, and how to unmake them. Rising Imperial power.
Bologna: the first universities and the Learned.
All of the ancient stuff (Roman gods and Mercurian teples and all that)

So, now your chapters are 7 500 words each. Have I mentioned Florence? Have I mentioned minor traditions like the night armies and spider dancers? Have we talked about what a Reniassance would look like? Have I told you about -any- of the non-Domus covenants? The Jerbitons in Perugia? Naples: the cradle of two houses, and the centre of the Avernine necromantic tradition? The sacred king of the Golden Bough? The Sicilian tradition which trained Criamon, who came up with branding binding and tattooing because it was -less- terrible? North Africa is in this tribunal theoretically but you'd not really get the chance to "go there" in the book. That needs a book of its own.

So, yes, one of the reasons I'd like city books is that I think Italy's too packed with material for us to fit it in one book. And this isb efore we have even done basic research. When we do, we are bound to find that Genoa and Milan and Trent and some other place each have something which could really work in them, if given space.

So, I mean Sicily, rather than Naples at one point in the post above, but you get the idea.

Rome would probably be a good choice, given a suitable larger word count limit.
Largely for the reasons given above.

Now the one I'd really like to see re-done (and the one that won't be the first to be re-done!) is Stonehenge.
While in theory I like the idea of taking out the stats to make the book more generally useful, I felt it made the book less useful to me. It also suffered from being the work of just one person, who seemed 8to me) to run out of ideas for the hermetic landscape before he was done with the book. Or to put it in another way: I was bored though half the 'hermetic' chapter.
It also suffers from the "Tremere are evulz!" syndrome - more so than any of the 3rd edition tribunal books, funnily enough - which is no longer part of canon, meaning that (IMAO) Blackthorn covenant doesn't really work anymore, which means a lot of the politics become inconsistent in my eyes.

I rather like the Lion of the North as it is, if that matters.

I would go for Rome as well, even if Iberia wouldn't be bad either! Lion of the North pretty much nailed it for my preferences, so I wouldn't mind it staying as it is.

I still prefer to see Provence and Hibernia before redone tribunals, though. having a setting-wide coverage is a fav of mine, even if I do not like parts of what is written. Muto-ing a tribunal book is always easier than Creo-ing one for a saga :slight_smile: My largest part of work for the Manx saga was the Hibernia tribunal by a far stretch.


Pretty sure david has stated that they will be covered before old ones will be revised - if ever.

Voted Novgorod because i really liked the earlier one, and used it for several campaigns.
But I´d like to see Provencal first.

I so what to read this book.

I gonna say one of my favourites statments and i say "Barro para casa"-"I sweep for home": Iberia please!

Seconding that. While those two hold the most interest for me, it probably makes most sense to update the oldest first. I'm greedy, and want the "whole picture," I'll buy any tribunal book, even if I can't imagine a use. They're just great reads!

I'd like to see a new Iberia... My memory might be playing tricks on me, but it was awfully...infernal.

I voted for Rome, though I would put Iberia as a very close second. I haven't read most of the Tribunal books in detail, only the ones I own (Lion of the North, Lion and the Lily, Sundered Eagle and Guardians of the Forest), but the 3rd editions books were fairly Infernal, as I recall, plus the Houses have changed so much since that edition. I do agree that Lion of the North is a great book, and could theoretically be left alone, other than maybe a downloadable rules conversion.

I voted for Rome, but yes, both Rome and Iberia were really Infernal and nowadays they seem a bit... "out of synch" with this edition. However, I think a better work could be done with Rome, if only because of the three Domus Magnus there... Well, that and everything else the sages around here already mentioned, of course.

It probably makes the most sense to start with the 3rd edition books, then move on to Levant (which will benefit from the Cradle and the Crescent), before wrapping up any stragglers. I'd wager that Atlas considers the fourth edition books to be "canon" except where they explicitly conflict with newer material, but as others have pointed out the 3rd edition books represent a fairly different Ars Magica.

Curious: what tribunals have NEVER had a treatment? (I started with 5thEd).

I believe Transylvania, which has the one on the way, and Hibernia are the ones that are untouched.
I thinks Pronvencal has been touched but isn't sketched out as the others have.

Transylvania has (to my knowledge) never had more treatment that what you see in HoH: TL before.

The old Order of Hermes book (2nd edition IIRC) had a 2-page write-up of the covenants of Hibernia tribunal (yes, all of them in just 2 pages) as an example.

Provencal was the setting of Mistridge, the 3rd edition example covenant, which managed to get it's own book. There was never a lot of details about the rest of the tribunal as such, but some details were given of some of the covenants with whom they interacted.
I think WW retained the rights to Mistridge when they sold the game (not sure, but I believe I've seen it referenced in a MtA book), so I doubt it will be in any (potential) upcomming tribunal book.

Come to think of it, there was a supplement called 'Covenants' back in the 2nd edition (I think) describing 4 covenants (1 of each season). I think they were all in the Provencal tribunal, really.

Yup. Lariander, Bellaquin, Val-Negra and the legendary Doissetep. I wonder if WW also retained the rights for these names... I would love to have Doissetep again!

If you look at the bottom of the credits/legalese page at the beginning of every 5th edition book it mentions that OoH, Tremere, and Doissetep are trademarks of WW and used with permission. Interestingly, from what I've read Doissetep hasn't been mentioned in the body of any 5th edition work.