Harsh in what way, exactly?



It is nice to have a place to discuss what we all like and dislike about Ars outside of an OOC tab in a currently running game.  I think it'll help to refine the games some of us  may be considering running, open us to new ideas about the game and how it works (or doesn't).

Statesman88, don't forget to bump the forum so we don't accidentally miss anyone looking to join the community.

Ars Magica is a complicated system. Baroque even. With corebook chargen alone there are four hundred points to distribute in five point chunks between a shitload of abilities. Then you add other books, which creates a lot of virtue combinations to process, but that's still manageable. But then there are Covenants, City and Guild, familiar binding and development, library management, etc., etc. One player had like five wives as support characters and another had a bunch of children or apprentices or something, and there are hundreds of mythic pounds to spend, which is a term that's not even mentioned in the corebook. And I have no idea how to approach all that.

To clarify: I'm not hating on callen's game. It's probably a fine game. I'm just saying that it's not for me. That being a new player, there are far too many factors to process without feeling like I'm falling by the wayside compared to other players who have greater system mastery. Creating a character in Ars Magica is a big hurdle to jump. But if you then have to develop that character for five or seven or ten years after the gauntlet in an even more complicated environment with a greater number of factors - that's an even bigger hurdle.

If you'll forgive me a mangled D&D analogy, it's sort of like comming to a first game with a Fighter and learning that it's a level 10 (complexity, not power level) game and the other players are Shadowcraft Mage, Planar Shepherd Druid and a Factotum.
This message was last edited by the player at 09:21, Thu 18 May 2017.

In reply to longesway (msg # 17):

Ok, I understand better now.  Thanks for clearing that up and I totally get the analogy.  It's hard to make a good decision on what direction to take to advance a magus or companion without really having a good grip on the game.
Ars is a game of niches in a way.  There's a LOT of things you can do and you may not care for every aspect of the game.  It can get overwhelming.  I've been playing for a while and I run across new aspects of the game every now and then.  Everyone does.  But I totally get what you were saying.
A lot of the time (speaking personally here) what happens character-wise is that you have a neat concept, spend a while developing it, stat it out, play it for a bit and then re-use it if another game comes along.  I've got about three or four good character concepts that I keep and use that way...

I've also found that if you need help bending a character to fit in the rules (,or vice versa) most Ars players/Storytellers are more than willing to help or at least lend advice on how to get it done elegantly.

It seems that most everyone rated Combat pretty far down the list of preferences in a Saga.  I'm curious as to personal reasons why?

Is it the combat mechanics?  Is it the brutality of the system?  A preference for other types of conflict?

Combat is a meaningful challenge, one that can be easily scaled in difficulty in most games. I enjoy that challenge. But more fun, for me, is exploring the world and seeing a story progress, and seeing my character grow within that context.

I think a big draw for me would also be covenant management- having a community to grow and help prosper, through challenges and increasingly inventive solutions to problems with limited resources.

Personally, I usually enjoy combat in the games I play in, but I have not had enough experience of Ars Magica combat to comment intelligently on it.
This message had punctuation tweaked by the player at 23:51, Tue 20 June 2017.

Any chance of opening this group up a bit more?  Maybe (since it's a community and not a game), assign everyone as GM so we can start threads and such?

I know I'd personally like to see personal threads (post your character up on a thread with some history, stats, etc...), and Covenant threads (get an idea of who's who and what's where in our community).

I mean, it's great being a part of the community and all, but we could do so much more rather than just 'be'.  :P

Too many GMs risks one GM mistakenly deleting a thread or getting hacked or changing settings, but I went ahead and added the first three active community members to join--zylphyr, callen, and witchdoctor--as GMs. You can add new players, add threads, etc. :)

There is also the Editor level, so there can be one GM and several editors.

In reply to witchdoctor (msg # 19):

I enjoy combat. I just enjoy other pieces more. Sometimes that's a problem with ranking instead of putting everything individually on a scale, for example.

What are some of the stranger/weirder things that you've taken inspiration from for Sagas or characters or covenants, etc?

Did you ever play the old board game Labyrinth?  The one where you slide tiles around the board to create paths so you can get to the treasure?  I once created a ruined covenant based on that.  Due to some experiment gone wrong, the layout of the covenant was constantly shifting, so every time you went through a door it would lead to a different place than it had before.  Unfortunately that game collapsed before I got to use it.

Yes, actually. I have a copy in my room form when i picked it up at a yard sale. I love board games and card games, especially bluffing games or old board games with unique twists. I think its very interesting, especially trying to look forwards a few moves ahead.

I've used a plethora of odd sources for some of my inspirations. Everything from my daughter's Barbie DVDs to Western novels to sci-fi B movies for source material.

In reply to Dr. Mindermast (msg # 28):

I recall playing that game, though I did not own it. I suppose a friend did. I can see it could be a potential game concept for a variant on the conventional "dungeon."

Well, after losing over half of my players, I have decided to shut down my apprentice game, Griffin Hall. I don't know what it is, but from what I've seen, Ars Magica games are doomed on this site.

I don't think it's limited to just Ars games.  A lot of different games I've played in have folded because of player attrition, GM disinterest or a variety of reasons.  I feel like it may be just a feature of PbP games.

In reply to witchdoctor (msg # 33):

I have seen a lot of games of a wide variety of types fail on RPOL, usually due to players dropping out, though sometimes I think that was a result of poor GMing.

If I may, I find the problem usually resulting in leniency.  As a GM, you should insist in the RTJ that players post a minimum of 5 times a week.  That's too often for most players to even make a character, and if a game isn't getting daily updates, it dies.  The games I'm in, which have remain active even months into the game, all have a 5-a-week obligation.  1 is more of a, 1xp per IC post, maximum of 1 per day, maximum of 5 per week, but even that's enough to insure people post regularly, because it's the ONE game where everyone sees their character advancing.  The only disadvantage to that one is that, for some players, once they have that 5xp, they don't post again until the following week, slowing the game down a bit.  :P

I like the XP idea. :)

To a point, I agree.  But my experience has also led me to believe that the lacking is often by the GM.

Players ebb and flow online; they come and they go, they post fluently now but intermittently later.
The game dies, in my option, when the GM gives up on it.

Some of my favourite games on RPoL have been slow posting games, when the GM and players maybe only post once a week or fortnight.  But so long as the GM and one players (and it needn't be the same player) are posting, the game continues.

Two key elements to this:
1/ when a post is made, make it count.  I play in a very slow game, but every time the GM posts, the story gets a good push along.  And I make sure I do the same with my posts.  As does the other players still posting.   Its slow, but its worth it.  Its like a weekly TV show; if it's good, you'll wait for the next episode.
2/ the GM has to be willing to wait for the player responses ... just as they for the GM's.  Some good games have died because the GM keeps saying, "I'll wait for xx to post".   And while the game goes on hold waiting for an absent/disinterested player, the otherwise interested players loose interest themselves.   Work with what you have, even if its just one or two players.   Because otherwise, you will loose them.    Personally, I usually feel that a GM 'waiting for xx player' is just using that as an excuse to cover the fact that they themselves has lost interest.

It's an old roleplaying adage:  do something, because the default alternative is to do nothing.
This message was last edited by the player at 01:46, Thu 20 July 2017.

The problem is that posting every day isn't an option for all people.  If you have a group where everyone can post that frequently I'm sure it's great, and that probably does help to keep people engaged.  But it means that those of us who want (or need) a more relaxed pace are left out in the cold.

In reply to Galley Slave (msg # 37):

I have seen some slow games continue successfully for years, but I also agree that the GM has a responsibility to keep the game active as long as there are any players who are responding.
I have been rather surprised n some games how some seemingly key character could drop out and yet the game could adapt and go on the the surviving players and GM made an effort to work around the absences.

If any of you were looking to get a bunch of the books for a great price, check these out:

https://bundleofholding.com/pr...aign=247-8ArsMagica5
https://bundleofholding.com/pr...aign=247-8ArsMagica5