Writing books

Games Discussion Ars Magica
41

Right, don't have my books available and confused roots with branches. What I recalled is that there were astonishly few of them available (9 out of 15?). And they cost a ridiculous amount of build points for a junior covenant compared to really good Order-wide-desirable books (like say a Lvl 15 Q16 tome).

So consequently I never see many junior covenants start with them - which surely they should.

I proposed 5/15 'root collections' for three reasons.

  1. because they are much easier to write than 6/21s and there is NO excuse for any gaps
  2. because lvl 5 already has a significant place in the Arts framework - Magi require Level 5 in every Art to properly open the Arts of an Apprentice. Thus it seems a reasonable thing to have a Level-5-of-everything volume 'set' distributed order wide or available as the 'right' of every apprentice. Sort of Ars Britannica Encyclopedia, there's one on every covenant shelf.
  3. because is slightly less than min/maxed and still leaves room for the really skilled writers to have written the 'definitive' Arts Roots

The first 5th Ed saga I played in (converted from 4th Ed) saw my Writer Bonisagus librarian immediately (upon converting to 5th) embark on a project to fill this startling gap. But the more I've played since the more convinced I am that it is a glaring gap and should be better filled than the canon allows.

I would be tempted to make this 'root collection' free of build points for a starting covenant or maybe 1/10 cost (so they cost only 2bp each, or discount to 25bp for the complete set of 15) but to compensate make every Quality or Level value of other Art books that is higher than 10 be worth triple (triple the amount over 10 that is). So the extremeluy useful L15Q16 text would cost ((10+53)+(10+63))= 53 bp instead of 31. If you want those extreme books either pay through the nose or play stories for them!

This is for a spring covenant of course. A starting summer covenant may lower the extra cost for the good books to double, and an Autumn just to standard cost perhaps (just musing on the page here.

This biggest downside is that you would then expect every apprentice to start with at least 5 in more or less every Art as it will cost him just one season of reading in each year of his apprenticeship. It does take some of the flavour out of the order... :frowning:
I rather suspect this is why canon is as it is, instead of what it logically should be.

1 Like
42

Doubled post

43

Why is it that your young covenant wants to waste its time on this? I ask as the guy who invented the Roots of the Arts. There's no reason for a spring covenant to bother with them.

Why? A word to you if you are a new player:

Generalisation is mediocrity.

That is, if your magus tries to be a perfect generalist, he will never amount to anything much and will be substantially less effective in doing anything in his life than most apprentices.

Specialisation is a very good idea.

I'm sure some almost-roots exist, filling the gaps. The point of the roots is that they are -excellent-.

I can't see why they'd do this, given that, as you've just noticed, it takes away around 11-13 seasons of study -away- from the thing they are really interested in. True generalism wrecks young magi, and their masters would -know- this.

44

The 5 in every art need is not to become a generalist, Timothy, but to train an apprentice. You must have 5 in every art to train apprentices. As such, the roots of the arts are perfect for specialists: only 1 season of study and you know enough about a given art to open it.

They would be considered general "introsduction to XXX". Most libratries have them because they are useful, but they are not the authorities in a given subject either. More of a good overview on the subject. Useful for all the magi in the covenant at one point oranouther in their lives... unless you have excellent books on the subject that are not on high demand on the covenant. That last bit is important, since the L20 Q50 books (now THAT would be a book! :laughing: ) might not be available very commonly to be studied. IMS at least, there is competition among the magi to get access to the best resources of the covenant sometimes. Books would fall in this category :slight_smile:

But the most important thing is the apprentice-trainer potential that they have. And the fact that they are mentioned as being extremely common in the order IIRC. Serf's parma, but IIRC the last bit, it would be logical to have those lousy books (from a specialist's POV, as you rightfully pointed out) on dioscount rates at covenant creation. My take on this, at least :slight_smile: It also makes the BIG books much more valuable at any stage of the game, even at covenant creation.

Cheers,

Xavi

45

REALLY? :open_mouth: Tell us more, Xavi! :unamused:

(I think most readers are past the ABC's, here. I'll bet TF is. Feel free to assume as much.)

You miss TF's point. What newly gauntleted apprentice is going to immediately train an apprentice? Some? Maybe, sure, but not all, hardly most, or even a sizable percentage.

That is TF's point, unless I'm much mistaken, and that is what a new covenant could well have in mind when gathering the core elements of a library.

And that creates a specialist??? No, a Summa of Quality 15 is perfect for a specialist. But I can confidently say that no one, not even you, would call a mage, even a newly gauntleted one, with their specialty Art at only 5 a "specialist". (Creo 5, Rego 5, Ignem 5, Know the Terror that IS the Fire Specialist!) (Are you afraid yet?)

Which gets back to TF's point- specialists desire higher Level Summae. The Quality is in the ballpark, but the Level is useless for the advancement they seek.

(Most magi I build immediately want to study the Arts they have already focused on, to allow for more reliable spell casting. Some might want to fill in ~some~ gaps, but a 5 in each? Waaaay down on the priority list!)

Now, such a collection of L5Q15 summae would be useful to toss to an apprentice rather than entrust them with the priceless L20 Q50 tome (or whatever), but only to Summer/Autumn covenants, where apprentices are more commonplace, (OR the desire to qualify to find one is!) I would think that for most Covenants and most Arts, a higher level, lower quality Summa would be a painful but preferable choice.

46

Yup, seems I missed his point. :blush:

Somehow, I still think a starting covenant is likely to get the roots and branches way more easily than even one L15 Q15 tome. Along the lines fo a new monastery having tro do with the bible, without all those fancy high quality books of the Bible comentators and christian philosophers, basically. You get what is easy to get, most of the time, not what you desire. For the later, there are stories to be told :wink:

Xavi

47

Of course such tomes are more easily obtained, but are they then more desirable? That is, would you sacrifice 3 L5/Q15 Arts for one 12/12 Art, worth "half" the value by the rules?

For a starting covenant, most of my characters would, in a heart beat.*

(* Unless they're real specialists, then Level 12 is still useless to them.) 8)

Work a little more, get one or two gems, and fill in as you go. (Hence, TF's comment about "a waste" to get the wampy roots at this stage.)

There are lots of things I can get easily, that I pass up so I can get what I want. You too, I bet, if you think about it. :wink:

48

The person I was responding to said, as I interpreted it, that all apprentices would study these for one season a year during apprenticeship. How is that not 5 in all arts at graduation? It has nothing to do with the need to train apprentices in his model. I agree that's what the roots are -for-, but its not what he's suggesting them for.

If I understand his model correctly, the apprentices would study the roots during apprenticeship and get 5 across the board, plus tiny top-ups. That's not how I see anyone behaving, with the exception of House Tremere just after the Schism, which really did have "breeder" magi. (Have I mentioned them in canon? I think they were taken out...anyhow, they were magi able to take apprentices as soon as they were out of apprenticeship who dedicated their lives to teaching. They were pretty much always wimps, mystically, but were kind of like the Reconstruction Genewration Japanese living in poverty so that they could build up the House's economy again.)

That model aside, there's no point in young magi, or their apprentices, getting a 5 in everything. It's a lot more efficint, for example, to just get high scores in your favourite Technique.

49

I'm also new here.

Back in the day or ArM4 I had my horrified troupe discover in their ancient library the following (after a quick conversion to the current edition):

(Untitled)
Bonisagus, compiled by Diedne

Upon initial examination this book appears to be practically useless. It is a compilation of letters which discuss the nature of magic. Unfortunately all the letters contained within are from but a single author. A careful examiniation reveals that all the letters are addressed to Diedne, the founder of the former house of the same name and are written by Bonisagus himself and furthermore these are the original letters, not copies. The book itself is clearly written and very tutorial in its style. It is obvious that it was intended as a teaching aid, but it is equally obvious that the letters were never intended to be bound into a single volume. The book’s leather cover is embosed only with the image of the Three-fold spiral, or Triskel, the hated (alleged) symbol of thrice damn’d House Diedne. This book is thus very dangerous for a Magi to possess, especially if its existance is discovered by members of houses of Guernicus, Flambeau or Tremere.

By itself the book is a Summae in Magic Theory with a level of 7 and a Quality of 13 (Com+5, +3 base, +1 skilled scribe, +1 skilled binder, +3 Good Teacher, +0 resonances). If Diedne’s replies were to be found and studied beside this text then the two together would constitute a Corespondence Tractus on Magic Theory with a Quality of 10 (Com+5, +1 skilled scribe, +1 skilled binder, +3 Good Teacher, +0 resonances).

Naturally trying to find the other volume, if it still exists, is fraught with difficulties and peril.

1 Like
50

Salve PlanetNiles,

I'm pretty new here to so I'm maybe not the right to welcome you ... Well, I do it nevertheless.

I like your book, it has the potential for a great story arc! Especially if you make your players fear the discovery of this book :smiling_imp:

Ave
Widewitt

51

Bonisagus might have created the arcane ability Magic Theory back in the 8th century, but I’m not sure there is any reason to believe he was any good at it. Four hundred years later any competent wizard is probably capable of feats which would make the founders hair stand on end.

In our saga we have now described the ‘Principia Magica’ as the authority for Magic Theory at level 3 and quality 12. This suggests an ability level of about six, which is probably generous but we wanted to give Bonisagus some credit.

[base 3, +1 scribe,+1 binding, +1 illustration, +3 communications, +3 good teacher]

This would also suggest he could have written 3 Tractatus of quality 12.

In the 400 years since there have been perhaps 56 ‘Folios of the Colentes Arcanorum’ published containing say 100-150 Tractatus of which at least 20-30 would have been on Magic Theory, especially in the early volumes.

As the key ability of the order we reckon there must be a total of 50-60 sound/excellent Magic Theory Tractatus circulating. This ties in with the description of the Great Library of Durenmar in the ‘Guardians of the Forest’

So a modern Master of Magic Theory after 40 odd seasons of study, could reach an ability level of 14 or more. Such a wizard could write a Lvl 7 Summa with a quality similar to that you have suggested.

I think that the most interesting aspects of books and correspondence written by the founders should be the complete disregard they pay to the traditional limits of Hermetic magic. Correspondence between Diedne and Bonisagus should be much more revolutionary then a set of Tractatus on Magic Theory.

Our general assumption is that the Order of Hermes is at the peak of its power in the 13th century. There is a sizable body of knowledge accessible through books, and there is still enough accessible vis to keep wizards from each others throats.

As vis supplies start to dwindle the ability of Wizards to surpass the knowledge recorded in hermetic books will fade. Equally conflicts between covenants will become more common, and we are planning to timeline a second schism war into the later 13th century. This time between Tribunal’s?

By such reckoning the study of vis will be nigh on impossible (or criminal) by the mid 14th century and each generation of wizards will be weaker than their parens. The order will finally fading away into the renaissance 250 years later, with a few secretive wizards surviving on the wisdom of the Masters of Magic of the 13th century.

52

My personal take on hermetic Magic Theory would be that Bonisagus was the authority on the subject and when a magus improves their ability in the subject they gain a better understanding of his theory. Of course there have been a number of breakthroughs in magic theory over the last four centuries and these have been integrated into modern Magic Theory.

However the text in question would be valuable not only for its concise explanation of magic theory, with a focus on formulaic magic, but also for the fact that its original and in the founder's own hand. The fact that its now effectively a 'banned book' due to its intended audience only increases its value.

The real insight the text would provide is into very roots of hermetic magic. Inside the letters are topics that never made it into any volume of Principia Magica either because they were too complicated or too difficult to explain in that format. Not only would the text cover these advanced topics but also point to lines of inquiry, and related breakthroughs, that nobody else has ever seen or followed. Principia Magica is the finished product, the edited highlights, but the letters show you the mechanism behind modern hermetic Magic Theory, stuff modern magi take for granted but for the founders were minor breakthroughs. Thus the letters provide insight to anyone with a regular understanding of magic theory.

The problem is how to express that within the structure of the rules. I decided to do this as a tractus. If, for example, the troupe had burned the book outright further development would have been pointless. As it was they shipped it to Durenmar anonymously and washed their hands of it.

Naturally the long term value and use of the book should vary from troupe to troupe depending upon the needs of their saga.

# # #

Lets invent an example based upon real-life.

Towards the end of his life Albert Einstein was working on a grand unifying theory that he apparently never completed. We don't know anything about it as his notes were never found.

Now let's presume that you're a physicist. What if you found letters from Einstein to Heisenberg in which the two men discuss and work towards unifying their different fields. How valuable would they be? Sure they don't teach you much about relativity you didn't already know and Einstein's grasp of quantum physics is nowhere near as good as yours. But they give you pointers towards a grand unified theory that nobody else has pursued.

How valuable would those letters be?

53

Well, either ~very~ valuable, or not much at all, depending on the current GUT, and the current state of the field vs Einstein's original insights.

Both approaches are valid - one assumes that Bonisagus had insights into magic that have not since been equaled, and the other that Bonisagus was seminal to the Hermetic model of magic, but has long since been surpassed by later breakthroughs and insights - no one to equal his, but collectively overwhelming in their progress.

For a counter example, look at Gregor Mendel, the monk who, in the mid 1800's, single handedly discovered genetic theory. While it can be stated that he, and he alone, established both genetics and heavily influenced the modern scientific method, his works would be a historical curiosity to any but a beginning student. Elementary and more than adequate for any who wanted to do breeding experiments, but hardly an "Idiot's Guide to Cloning and the Human Genome".

Both views of Bonisagus are perfectly valid in a Saga, and perhaps, in part, there's no reason why both can't be true - while Hermetic Theory has outpaced his early discoveries, there are still riches to be found within those insights.

54

I agree with both of you however:

55

Well, you can still have any number of minor breakthrough, for exemple, like the creation of the Aegis.

56

I think that the main value of an authority isn't necessarily in its intrinsic quality, but in the fact that the whole field is based on it. Thus you should be able to find quite a few "Commentary on Bonisagus' Principia Magica, by XXX of YYY," which would be pretty useless to someone who hasn't read the authority.

In fact, I propose that most early works of the Order are probably of that kind.

By the way, Niles, that's a pretty cool idea. Consider it stolen forthwith. :smiley:

57

I notice in the posts by many people online Summa seem to be far more popular than other written forms. Perhaps my campaign was unusual but we found that ultimately the only way to develop as a mage was to obtain an endless supply of tractati. In short, my magi felt summa were for 'newbs'.

The problems with summa were the limited skill level you could obtain, the fact that they are enormously expensive and time consuming to create, and the fact that one book last any magus a very long time and thus its not easily available as a covenant resource.

The benefit of being more 'tractati based' was the magi themselves created several volumes for the purpose of trade, and indeed circulated copies.

Is this the experience of others, as online library listings dont look much like ours did in the last saga. I wondered if it was just that people lacked the imagination for so many book titles, or perhaps the libraries I have seen online were from new covenants.

58

Tractatus are more or less the only way to go. (Well commentaries are in many ways better, but by the rules they're sort of a funky tractatus). In fact, the entire reoccurring complaint about how non-focused player magi can't write anything but "vain" texts disappears when you consider that any specialist will have exhausted their own library of tractatus and almost certainly be open to the idea of purchasing even a "vain" tractatus in their field of study, because such books are one of the few ways they can advance their knowledge.

Do the libraries that I created for my last game
viewtopic.php?t=319&start=0
fit closer to your conception of what hermetic libraries should look like?

59

Aye, thats much more along the lines of what libraries from my games looked like. Apart from a few Summa they inherited magi mainly spent time creating tractati for oneanother. They did write a few 'specialist' Summa, such as would yield max seasonal XP for their apprentices etc - but mainly the shelves were stacked with an ever growing number of tractati volumes.

60

They are, for the most part, depending on your definition of "newb" and the typical Level of available Summae.

I think "most people online" are yakking about Spring libraries, perhaps? And any but the most jaded covenant needs a solid base of summae before beginning the infinite quest for Tractatus. While one nice Tract can give anyone maybe 10 pts, usually for every specialist in one Ability or Art there are several "newbs" who still need to get up to speed - and that's summae.

RK, I think your sketch above is typical for any advanced lib' work. With a few obvious exceptions, if you have 2 Summae, one is usually clearly preferable and adequate, and the other cries to be traded for Tract's.