Talk about anything.

The latest movies. Other games. Food.

It's been a couple of hours, and we have four community members already. Welcome, all!

I'm very new to Ars Magica, myself. I think we have some veterans among us...

o/ folks

Hi, everyone. I'm one of the veterans. I've been playing for over 20 years but mostly 5e, including play testing some of it. I'm the one who wrote (and must complete when I get my hands on the last few books) the spell guidelines pdf. I've written a few other things that get referenced every now and then.

I've played in a few games here that have lasted a while, but mostly I've joined them to watch them die quick deaths.

Congrats on the writing and playtesting, called.  Not everyone gets a chance to do those things for games they like!

Your experience is pretty standard for most players on RPOL, I think.  I know I share a similar experience...not just with Ars though.  I've played in quite a few but none have lasted and I've ran a few games that lasted about 6 months or less.

I don't claim to have any fame on the game, but I have been playing since 1st edition, still have all the core books.  My 'claim to fame', should it be called such a thing, to the Ars Magica community, was the invention of what was referred to as "Ars Fantasy".  A system that converted Ars Magica into a fantasy setting.  It included some basic rules on how to add races to the game, but more importantly, it did to combat what the Magica system did to magic.  5 Techniques: Defense, Power, Precision,  Speed and 2Weapons.  And 10 weapon categories, with rules on how to use those in combat settings...

I can't find the finished work, but I do see that I have a link to the old google-doc (though the font looks crazy now, wasn't like that when I created it :P). I was creating it on before it was finished... maybe I will go back and re-finish it...

https://goo.gl/4MZNqz

As someone who has never played ArM, either edition, what argument can someone make for me to buy 5th instead of using the free 4th?

5th edition is a much 'cleaner' rule-set, I feel.  There are some glaring changes between 4th and 5th editions but they're not completely different systems.  If you understand 4th, you'll understand 5th but as I said before, there are changes.

Most games run on RPOL use 5th edition rules.  You can't really make a character in 4th and play it in 5th for instance.  It's a bit of a pricey book but not overpriced for the size and quality of book.  I'd recommend buying the 5th edition book if you want to play.

My first recommendation would be to just pick up 4th because 5th isn't so drastically different. A number of things get simplified moving to 5th. That way at least you'll know if you like the system without putting in a financial investment.

If you want to go further, you have to buy books for either. Now things come down to the particulars. These are my top reasons for why I far prefer 5th over 4th:

• 5th is very consistent and simplified in mechanics. For everything like Virtues and Flaws, they're free or they're Minor/Major, Minor valued at 1 and Major valued at 3. That's throughout the systems for all sorts of things. For Abilities and Arts, everything works as 1, 1+2=3, 1+2+3=6, etc. or 5 times those. So there is tons of consistence.
• 5th has in-edition realm books for all four realms (Divine, Infernal, Faerie, Magic). That's really handy for familiars and for anyone with related powers.
• Mysteries were planned into the system from the beginning, not just an afterthought tried out later on. As a result, they function like a lot of other things.
• While there are still some game-breaking things, the streamlining cleaned up a lot of those issues.
• It's been around for over a decade, so it's the version almost everyone plays these days.

Going over the 4th edition PDF has me leaning towards buying the 5e PDF, unless a bunch of people really want to play 4e. I can see how just a little streamlining would make a good system much better. :)

In reply to zylphyr (msg # 6):

Sounds cool. I'll try to catch some time to look at it later.

When I was working on a system of my own, I took the same basic idea that the warriors should get something akin to the magi to balance the coolness out. In too many systems where it's not intended, you're just a lower tier if you don't use magic. (It's intended in ArM, so that's fine.) But I never tried anything of the style you did.



In reply to statesman88 (msg # 10):

Most of the 5e pdfs are less expensive, quicker to get, and potentially easier to get (depending on where you live or if the book is out of print) than the print books. I do really like print books, though. And a bunch of us could let you know which books are most critical for one thing or another before you start buying beyond the core book.

Hey, everyone! Thanks for making this forum and letting me join.

I started playing Ars Magica back when 1st edition was released. I was the primary Storyteller in a Saga that lasted years. We migrated to 2nd edition but didn't move to 3rd. As a group, we didn't like the changes being made by White Wolf.

Then I joined the Navy and moved away. I didn't even think much about Ars Magica for a decade or so. After getting out of the service and moving to Alaska, I looked at 4th edition but didn't have anyone interested in playing so didn't pick it up.

By the time I did have a group for Ars Magica, 5th edition was out and that's what I went with and I'm quite happy with 5th. Currently, I'm running a Saga for my home group and I have an Apprentice game here.

I want to play Ars Magica as a players as well as the Storyteller. I've joined a number of games here and all but one died before really getting into a story. I'm in callen's game and while it is still alive, we've lost a lot of players.

Hey everyone.  Slightly experienced player here; I wouldn't call myself a "veteran" compared to some of the others.  I dabbled in 4th ed but all of my serious playing, to the extent that I've been able to have any, has been in 5th.  The collapse of my tabletop campaign after only four sessions is one of the great regrets of my gaming life.  Stupid real life getting in the way.
This message was last edited by the player at 11:35, Tue 16 May 2017.

Yo!
A completely inexperienced player here. Read a bunch of 5e material, made characters, but never managed to join the game. The PbPs on atlas forum have been running so long that they are nigh-on impossible to join and callen's game on this forum uses older characters, which is harsh on a newbie :D
</endrant>

It's nice to have a place to talk to people about Ars Magica. Hope we all get along!

Yeah, it would be cool if someone started a game focused on wizards only a few years past Gauntlet at most.

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

Did that just come up on your Facebook feed?

It did on mine

No. I got an email from David Chart on the old Berklist and it was posted on the Atlas forums.

I'm going to have a look at it later this evening.
I've only got the base rulebook (PDF) myself, so if I can afford it ...

In reply to Galley Slave (msg # 43):

I only have the 1st and 4th edition so I might well update.
This message was last edited by the player at 01:43, Thu 24 Aug 2017.

I am one of those that got the bundle. I had heard of Ars Magica here and there. I was waiting to pounce, patiently, patiently. I am looking to play a long-term but casual posting rate. I want to explore perhaps generations of wizards throughout a length of long time.

This bundle is awesome, If I didn't already have all of them. Now... I wish the Character Generator would have gotten some love and they bundle a package for it up, Metacreator Bundle for Ars Magica would have been nice. I'm really hoping someday a new Generator comes out. Metacreator is nice but man its dated. Herolab would be ideal but they think there packages are made from gold. Too pricey.

The price is really reasonable for what you get.  I'd jump at it if I didn't already have most of the books in the bundle already.

Side question, Has anyone ever set Ars Magica in a Fantasy Setting, Instead of a Real world Setting? i.e Not using real world places, etc. Using Fantasy Created ones, or even established Settings from other RPGs? Like Ars Magica set in Forgotten Realms. Or even a Fantasy creation of your own design?

Yeah a friend on G+ mega-reviewed the game as the greatest game he has ever played. His background and dedication to the name made me order it right there.

I was a player in a game sent in Harnworld here on RPoL.

Callen, that was Thruxus' game, I believe.

I don't remember running a game in Harnworld.

I know I tried using the map for D&D 4th Edition once as a setting for Ars Magica. But all my other attempts at Ars Magica have been set in a historical Setting. I've tried running Guardians of the Forest set in the Rhine Valley, and I tried doing one set in England near Stonehedge. I remember I did Calibas a few times too. Oh and a Lighthouse once that was actually pretty good. I think the Lighthouse one was set in the 4E D&D Setting if I'm not mistaken. I know a bunch of you here have played in the very short lived games I've attempted to run on here. Which by the way I apologize, Life always seemed to mess things up.

I've played in many of the AM games here ... and several of Thrux's other games.
One day, when I feel I can give it due attention, I'll run one myself.

I've had thoughts of a '(DnD) Birthright' style game  set in a  Middle Earth setting  ... where each player plays a stand alone wizard (with their own personal Covenant)  +  the leader of one nation.   On the basis of the 10 (based on the Forms) immortal wizards (xx the Gray, xx the Green, etc ... using the Form Vis colours); each Wizard being the 'best at (Form)' ...

That kinda thing.

I think the concept behind a good game is finding the right players, and the right Narrator. Character creation is so open, you have attributes, skills to choose, Major and Minor Virtues, and with opening up creation to all the sources besides the core, You have a buttload of options. I wouldn't mind a game that uses the Archetypes from the book. Instant creation, Poof, here is your character, spells, etc, Now form a background around it and lets start playing! Creation is fun, building your character from scratch is fun, and tweaking them to make the perfect is awesome, But its very time consuming and there is where a bunch of games faulter out. Just my two cents.

One aspect that I've always wanted to delve into with Ars Magica, was the Infernal. Being a Corrupted Character, with Tainted Virtues. Gifted, but with Summoning magics for Demons, the tempting Demonic Imp on the shoulder telling him to do this and that. but trying to hold on to his own humanity at the same time. Or at least hide it from the other Magi around him.

Aye. I'm a fan of playing demon summoners of all sorts, but there are problems with playing for team evil in Ars Magica.

1. The setting as written makes Infernal the Always Chaotic Evil plus Chaotic Stupid. Demons don't make cunning machiavellian plans, they just piss in everyone's cereal all the time, non stop. Because patience is a virtue and demons don't have that so demons can't plan.
2. Divine is unbeatable. Explicitly. You can never win against the Divine, in either short or long term. So there's no point in playing for the Infernal side, the one true way is temporarily allying with them to get temporal power on earth for your personal non-Infernal goals.
3. Ars Goetia is rather broken. It's easy to make a goeticist capable of summoning and controlling Might 30 demons, which is the top peak of demons in RoP:I.

1 and 2 together mean that for a fullfilling and fun Infernal game you have to write your own heaven and hell more or less from scratch. There are options here. You can take Paradise Lost and Demon the Fallen, and have demons be ambiguously evil, with understandable reasons for rebellion, ability to plan, and belonging to all sides of morality spectrum. You can take Shin Megami Tensei and replace Infernal and Divine with Law and Chaos. YHVH is not omnipotent and omnibenevolent, he's very strong, authoritarian and selfish. Demons are not cast down dregs, they are everyone who didn't sign up for YHVH's reign. You can do lots of stuff. But Infernal as written is intentionally bent to being unfun and anti-fun.

Hey so I just wanted to ask a question surrounding pacing. Assuming you have a group of people who are willing to play how long do you typically give for Character/ Covenant Creation? I know there are a lot of factors at work but in your own opinion what works best.

2 Sessions for me.  Half of one of those sessions is in Covenant creation, which we use real-life maps for...

I should have been slightly clearer. I meant on RpoL. Also hey zylphyr.

Oh, can't help there.  Never ran a game here, and nobody's ever let me play in one either.  :P

From my experience, the game tends to die an early death (usually before creation is done or only barely afterward) the more time is spent on creation. I lost one this way myself and have seen it happen to a whole bunch I joined as a player. Meanwhile, the one I joined that survived well had the covenant created by the SG ahead of time. My current one also had the covenant created by the GM, and they players who created characters are at least mostly still with me, enough that the game won't die. This is why I'd earlier suggested somewhere here that it seems best for the SG to set up the covenant ahead of time.

Of course, we lost a game before it really started with the SG using the pre-made covenant. But that was because the SG vanished as opposed to player loss.

Are you thinking of starting one here? Please! Pretty please! There are only two currently running here, and only one is in English. (I might be able to manage French, but it would probably be too much effort for me now that my French has decayed so much - never was fabulous anyway.) And I run that one in English. I'm really hoping to play in one.

I never did reply to this. It was Kilgs's game.

I actually am considering running one. I'm currently lurking in your game as it stands, learning vicariously. I was going to wait for the new year to come and all of the holiday stuff to settle out. I wanted to do a Spring Covenant but it might be too much to put on any novice characters so perhaps Summer. I'm open to opinions on that matter.

I might also consider taking on a Co-SG. I know it's not typical but Ars Magica has a good bit of overhead and it could potentially be better to have someone to fill in when life starts beating me over the head.

Spring covenants can work well with novice players, too. But you can still have it set up in some manor ahead of time. For instance, it's founded by some very senior magus who recruits a bunch of younger magi. Then the novice players don't need to deal with covenant creation. Older covenants work, too.

If covenant creation seems daunting on your own, if you haven't looked at it, take a look at Semita Errabunda at the bottom of this page: http://www.atlas-games.com/arm5/ . You can dump all the younger magi and companions, replacing them with ones the players design.

I am thinking about taking another stab at running an Ars Magica game here. If I do, I would be starting it up in early Spring.

My plan is to take a group of wizards fresh out of Gauntlet and have them sent out to start a new Covenant.

I have two ideas:

• The Curse of the Rhine Gorge from the Rhine Tribunal book.
• The Broken Covenant of Calebais

Oh, goodie!!! Two potential games starting up soon! I keep checking the listings with hope. This news is my early Christmas present. :)

I'll give you a heads up in your game when I'm about to start mine. I just need work to settle down before I go crazy and start a game.

Thanks.

Yes, craziness at work. Ugh. Fortunately, my work is now calm for the foreseeable future: coaching is over for the year and I don't expect another teacher to accidentally release my exam for next semester. So it should just be normal busy for quite a while. Great for running my game and joining others.

New game?  new game?

I'd be pretty interested in a new game too, although y'know, still new to Ars Magica and get that it's eh to bring a newbie into a pretty complex game. Still, fun potential news!

There are some experienced players around who can help.

I would be up for a game in the near future, especially if the GM is going to take care of the covenant details and we can go right into the story.

As I'm thinking about it, something else that I've found tends to slow games down at the start (and thus increase the risk of premature game death) is requiring players to create a whole cast of characters at the outset - magus, companion, and multiple grogs.  It's extra time and energy before the game can start, and in my experience most of it winds up being wasted if the game doesn't last beyond the first season and all those extra characters never even make more than a cursory appearance.  So there's my additional advice for those of you who are looking for it.

In reply to Dr. Mindermast (msg # 73):

Yes, you and I have similar insights into what seems to kill games. I think the same: keep character creation fairly short and get things moving along. For me, its all those multiple grogs and covenant details that add so much more effort, and the case of the covenant, require a lot of back and forth between players. If each player only needs to make a magus or a magus plus a companion (I do like the idea behind having the pair so your magus can do lab work.), there isn't a lot of up-front effort and momentum can be built up.

Also even though this might seem obvious to people with more experience its important to tailor the difficulty of tasks to something actually achievable. One of my first experiences with Ars Magica ended rather abruptly after our newly formed Covenant was besieged by a band of well-armed warriors.

If memory serves we had no grogs at the time and only one Magus with any true offensive ability.

You're absolutely right.

Now, I like to populate worlds, including placing obstacles the PCs can't deal with at the time. But I never force them to confront those obstacles. And if they do end up going against something like that, there are ways around it. So, for instance, when you see the super-ancient, super-powerful dragon, maybe you want to back off or talk to it instead of deciding to try to kill it. While that dragon could exist and might later present an interesting challenge, when they're not ready I wouldn't make such a dragon attack the covenant and force them to fight.

Hello everyone. As you saw I started a new game and was wondering how people most effectively divide there threads. Do you do it by locations or common threads for chapters/arcs/etc. I understand if the covenant, or some portion of it, goes adventuring that would necessitate a new thread but other than that.

Also how much roleplaying is involved with laboratory work. Considering its mostly, from my limited understanding, dice rolls and planning do you need individual threads of lab work? Is is a meaningful portion of gameplay or an extraneous distraction?

Lab work is very important to Wizards for advancement and development. It is also possible for interesting results in the lab to drive stories.

I would have a thread for each Wizard's lab work. If you use Groups, you can make these threads invisible to the other players.

Yeah, so that one Tytalus diabolist can feel safe...

But yeah, private threads are a good thought.  Especially if there are mystery cults in play.

Yes, this is a good idea. In my game I have a secret thread for each player where we can do lab stuff, mystery initiation, etc. It helps keep things in one place.

I would say lab stuff generally isn't role-played much, but there is a need to document things and double-check the process. So it's good to have a place for that. Even if there is room for role-play, I would tend to place that elsewhere. For example, a visiting magus for whom one of the magi is making something might be assisting in the lab, but that magus would be generally around the covenant to interact with everyone much of the time. So I would stick those things more publicly. There is always the PM option to the GM when something private needs to be stated in a public spot.

New Topic

If you as a Storyguide were going to make an Ars Magica 5E game set in colonial Massachusetts is 1692, What alternations to character creation would you make. I've just binge watched all of Salem and really enjoyed it. Also saw the Witch horror movie and it got my thinking. That might be a fun era to play in using Ars Magica. I know Magi would be more rare, Maybe even just two total, the game would have more Companions for the PCs, The Divine/Dominion would of course be taking over, Magic as a whole would be going towards Winter. The Order of Hermes would only be a myth. I know there are rules for actual witches in Ars Magica. Just suggesting a topic,

In reply to Thruxus (msg # 81):

Well, I'd be tempted to throw in some native magics. Possibly something similar to the Bjornaer, actually.  Or maybe amazingly similar to the shaman/shapechangers.
I wouldn't expect to see any Merinita.  I'd even go to a Castle Falkenstein idea that the native spirits and the fae don't get along very well.

Man that would be an AMAZING covenant to play a Pralician Ex Miscelania in...

I'd do a LOT more research into the Native tribes/bands of the area before lumping them into a single tradition of magic, especially one like you suggest.  It's trope-y and fairly inaccurate.

Honestly, it's really difficult to rectify European fantasy magic and Native magic.  There isn't a tradition of 'high fantasy' magic use in North America that wasn't invented by colonizing whites in literature and that totally skews the whole process.  There are cool and interesting monsters, heroes and legends but those are stitched together like a crazy-quilt from multiple tribes and lose a lot in the translation because so much was erased, suppressed or lost from those tribes.  It was ILLEGAL for Natives to practice their religion in the US until the 1970's...

There are a few historical traditions in Native magic but nothing like the Order of Hermes or even any of their rivals.  To be perfectly honest, 99% of Native magic could be summed up with hedge/folk traditions and most high powered/fantasy level magic accomplished by spirits.

An interesting take on the matter is that the land itself resisted European magic, acting like the Dominion in a way but separate from it's influence.  Magic auras rarely compatible with European magic and the fae refuse to set foot on the land.  That would definitely make things more challenging but maybe a bit more accurate.

As a Native, it's kind of cringe-y for me when stuff like this comes up because of a whole host of issues that come with it including the backdrop of what is to come whether or not the PCs are involved in the impending genocide or not...  I'm not trying to throw a wet blanket on your idea but I'm just saying that it's more multi-faceted than Disney's Pocahontas.

So I'm starting on the framework for the Ars Magica game I have set in Salem during 1692. I think I am going to make it a Location based game, Using a bunch of locations as areas around Salem. I have the Hedge Magic Revised book for 5E which has Folk Witches in it, which I think will work. Not sure when I am going to open the players wanted for it, But I'm not going to make it that large of a game, Its going to be small.

As for Native American Magic, I am thinking that I can use the Hedge Magic and Rival Magic books to piece together a Native American Tradition, if not a full Tradition, at least something mechanically that allows for Visions, Weather, Spirit, amulets and charms, Totems, Shapeshifting, etc. Most of which can just be picked up using minor virtues. I don't foresee the story having a PC as a Native American character, they would primarily be used in the background, unfortunately at the time many were antagonists because of the King William’s War, that wouldn't end for another five years.

So, I'll keep people updated if they are interested, If I post again it will be in the Advertisement thread.  I know I will need companions to flesh out some of the characters of the town. I wont be basing this off of an official timeline of events, nor will I be using the actual Salem Witch Trials. I might pick and choose parts from them, but I wont be following any particular story, plot, movie or show.

Invested Item Question: Could you have an invested item have the trigger "successful attack" to deliver a spell, lets say Wounds that Weep, along with the attack? My thought is that it would replicate the effect of the Tethered Magic virtue but not sure if its legal.

Personally, I wouldn't all "successful attack." I would allow "edge strikes something violently," though. I say this because I don't know how an axe would know if it hit a tree versus some animated wooden statue the user is fighting. That also means Wounds that Weep will be cast on each wolf, tree, etc. the axe hits without affecting nearly any of them.

I wouldn't worry about Tethered Magic. The cool thing with Tethered Magic is you can somewhat replicate these triggers with Formulaic and Spontaneous magic without needing a season. Magic items have always had triggers and have always been more flexible in this regard anyway.

In reply to callen (msg # 86):

Staying on that line of thought: Would adding He or An requisite add +1 magnitudes to Wounds that Weep?

Adding the requisite to allow it to work on animals or plants, yes, it would add +1 magnitude.

Excellent. Thank you.

So Magical Resistance does not extend to the items that a magus is carrying unless it is a talisman. If that's correct then wouldn't a spell that changes carried weapons, lets say MuTe(He) X, make all weapons wielded against a magus have to pass their Magical Resistance?

Isn't that the Pink Dot loophole? Like, technically speaking you could make an extremely minor change to a weapon (i.e. adding a pink dot) and it would then have to pass magic resistance?
As a newbie myself I was curious about that so I looked up other responses elsewhere The general consensus to that I've read about is to just houserule the loophole away for weapons because otherwise it gets silly.
This message was last edited by the player at 16:43, Mon 05 Mar 2018.

I had thought it might be strange but then there is the spell Blunting the Iron's Bite (MoH pg. 50) which does just that, although its not a pink dot but halving the damage/attack advantage of the weapon.

Well, true there is that, but in terms of internal logic if you have to use a spell specifically to reduce a weapon's damage wouldn't it mean you can't just apply magic to a blade and have it face your Magic Resistance? Or that spell itself would do that in which case it's even more powerful...

Perhaps? I suppose the argument then becomes the inverse: if I used magic to improve a weapons damage/attack advantage would it ignore Magic Resistance? I would say that most would agree that would not be true. If so then the inverse should be held to the same standard.

That being said I'll probably just go with the house rule of closing that loophole.

As someone playing a magus who uses weapons, I don't see the problem with someone casting a spell on my weapon and it then being unable to hit them due to their magic resistance. Same thing happens if I cast a spell on my weapon to increase its damage and then needing to penetrate the target's magic resistance.

There is a reason the Leander plans on getting good at Perdo and Vim. He has plans to invent a R: Touch, T: Ind, version of Wind of Mundane Silence. Combine that with a few Unraveling the Fabric of (Form) spells with the Fast Casting mastery ability and he will be ready for some of these type of shenanigans.

A number of odd questions:

I have a magus with Short Range Magic and Minor Magical Focus (Self-Transformation).

If he enchants an item to shapechange the user, does his focus apply?
If he enchants an item with the ability to change its own shape, does his focus apply?

After he bonds a familiar, will his focus apply to an enchantment that changes his shape to match the familiar's?

If he enchants his talisman with the ability to transform into a giant bear, can it continue to function as his talisman while a bear? If the bear is killed, what happens to his talisman?

If he enchants his talisman with the ability to transform from its natural shield form into a bear skin cloak, can he still use the Shape and Material bonuses that no longer apply but are attuned? Can he now attune it as a Cloak as well as a Shield?

Obviously I've never played a Muto focused magus before. And never had one in the games I ran either.

I'll let someone more experienced than myself answer Shadowsmith's question. I am particularly interested in the answer as well for obvious reasons.

That aside has anyone played a magus with Unaging (Minor Supernatural Virtue, ArM5 pg. 50)? How did you balance this with other flaws and virtues? My thought is that you would need to have something like Faerie Blood or even Strong Faerie Blood to qualify but that's not all to uncommon for magi.

That seems to entire lack "self."


I wouldn't think so, but I see what you're thinking. You're letting the item transform itself. In my mind, the magus has the mMF, so it's the magus's self here. It's also one of the most powerful mMF available, only a little under the animal mMF, so I wouldn't think it needs any boost.


I would think so. It's still his own shape that is being changed.


Ugh. Well, killed is probably easier than hurt. I would look at the rules for damage to items in C&G. From there I would try to relate the wounds taken to the damaged/broken scale. I would think killed = broken.


People go different directions on this. Basically, it boils down to essential nature v. current form determining bonuses. I really dislike current form myself, as it opens up so many problems that I feel you have to start making lots of arbitrary rulings to contain it. I far prefer the essential nature route myself, which would mean the bonuses are always based on it being a shield.

I agree, but just wanted to check.


It doesn't need a boost, but this is getting into that fuzzy area that is found in Ars Magica. I could see some groups allowing it and others not. I know that some of you on this forum have a lot more 'official' knowledge than I do.


The only reason I'm not sure on this is that as an enchantment on the Familiar Bond, it is under the familiar's control, not his own.


Killed = Broken seems fair to me. There is a reason that such use would be rare at best.

Wounds being turned into damage to the talisman seems like an interesting way of handling this aspect.


I tend to agree with callen here. Essential nature should trump current form as far as magic is concerned. Except for Heartbeasts, a shapechanged human is still a human.

Was this the Mainau game? Set on a small island in Germany? We found some red flowers that contained vis.

I was playing Chrysaetos of Bjornaer in that game. My wonderful lightning casting eagle. I fried a couple of chain mail wearing attackers and the game died mid combat. I still really want another chance to play him.

New Topic Question

Do you think its possible to run a game, restricting the players to a single House, for example an all Tremere Covenant? Do you think there would be enough diversity between characters?

Absolutely ... and creates focus and unity.

As I'm doing just that, I would say yes. But I was careful to choose a house that wouldn't pigeon-hole characters.

For me, pigeon-holing is fine, so long as its all 'up front', and the players get the chance to agree, or walk.

Creating a focused group creates unity and direction immediately; which often has be be worked on at the beginning of other games, and can cause friction and lack of cohesion ... which either takes time to rectify, or can even kill the game.

In reply to Galley Slave (msg # 104):

My worry with pigeon-holing is about preserving player niches. For example, if everyone's a Pharmacopean, it gets really hard to make characters significantly different than each other. Yes, that is a very narrow example, but I find some of the houses force things in that kind of direction. Others provide a lot more flexibility.

Yes, I like the unity and direction part of it a lot. It can make a lot of sense, too, such as with Tremere magi.

I find the unity and directions important, especially here online.
If one role-plays table top with friends, everyone already knows each other; knows their friends' styles etc.   And friends tend to co-operate from the beginning more readily than individuals who (not only) don't know each other, but aren't even face to face ... and we all know how different f2f is compared to anonymous online posting.

A clear cut focus group and scenario can make a lot of difference for me.

In fact, in many games, I give character generation benefits to a player for 'each other PC of your House/clan/mindset', as a way of incentive.

A single House saga would probably be quite fun. You would get to dive into the internal politics of the House more and if it is a Mystery House, explore multiple aspects of the Inner Mysteries.

Some Houses, especially Ex Miscellanea, offer a wide range of options. But even with the focused Houses, such as Tremere, there is still plenty of room to personalize your magi.

But as Galley Slave mentioned, make sure the players on on-board with the concept.

This is what I'm thinking about,


link to a message in another game

It looks good to me. I've been wanting to play a Spring Covenant for a while now. Are you accepting RTJ's yet?

For the people here yeah, I have a little more organization to do to it.

I find your setup interesting, I sent you an RTJ, but I have no idea what kind of Tremere magus I would play. I would like to work with the group to make sure we have a range of talents and will make a good group.

Perhaps not the place to discuss but I just got accepted. Decided to focus on the  Scout specialization. Looking to continuing expanding my Animals spells since I have Inoffensive to Animals, Affinity, and Animal Ken.

Thruxus I think your game looks very exciting! I like the idea of all of the characters being from the same house because you can get the full flavor of that house without having to play favorites within the group.

Waves at people.

Waves back at Lamech.

Welcome to the community. I'm always happy to see more people involved in Ars Magica.

Hey everyone. So I'm trying solicit some advice. I've finally convinced a friend in RL to check out Ars Magica and I don't want to scare them away. What is the best way, or ways you attempted in your own life, to introduce the game to a new person?

You could try a short one shot Grog adventure. Lets you get a feel for the basic mechanics without needing to dive into magic.

In reply to Pnvq12 (msg # 116):

Are any of them history buffs?  Ask them where in the 13th Century they would love to explore.  The enthusiasm of one might get them all into it.

@Shadowsmith

Perhaps. I feel like that magic system might be the main draw of the system for them tho.

@ dybbuk67

No expressed interest in 13th century. More of Victorian Era but I wasn't sure about adjusting the game to fit in that period.

Well, if you want to show off the magic system, go with a mage fresh out of Gauntlet. Keep it simple and let them explore magic a bit. Make sure the story gives them a chance to shine with their magic.

Don't dive into Covenant management right off the bat. Don't worry about setting up or maintaining a lab.

I admit, the magic system is the main draw of Ars Magica for me. But I do like the system otherwise as well. I prefer level-less and classless games.

Moving Ars out of it's setting usually takes a lot of legwork but can be fun.  A lot of the checks & balances on Magi are built into the setting so it can be a bit unbalancing to take them out of the setting but it can be done.

If you want to ease them into the crunchy parts of Ars, start them out as late-stage apprentices for a few sessions before fast-forwarding to post-Gauntlet.  That way they can feel out how magic works mechanically and have a better idea what they may like/dislike.

So, I started a Discord for Ars Magica. Here is the Invite if any of you want to join. Depending on if it jumps off, I'll start adding more to it. I'm gonna advertise for it over at the Atlas Forums and the Ars Magica Reddit also.

Hope to see you guys there.

https://discord.gg/n3TsHV

In reply to Thruxus (msg # 122):

Did you delete it?

https://discord.gg/RPNxD9

Invitation might have expired, Here ya go

Hmmmm.    Invites don’t seem to last to long.
Can we try again, please?

Or can you tell me the ‘conversation’ name that I can put into the searcher?

Ah, ok i see now. I turned it into a never expire link.

https://discord.gg/PRKGNhA

I've been looking through various sourcebooks and I've developed a strong interest in playing a Learned Magician. Perhaps one who has joined the Order and has Parma Magica and is working with an Order magus to figure out how to integrate his magic into Hermetic magic.

Hello;
I just came across this group yesterday.  I've enjoyed Ars Magica since the first edition, but have not gotten to play in years (OK, Decades).  Interested in seeing what's going on.

Welcome along, rmax.

Games on RPoL often have low longevity ... but those that last, usually do so well.
I'm not running any AM games, but I'll let those who are invite you along to their respectives.

Thanks.  Not sure I’m ready to jump into a game, but I’m interested in your discussions and to see what people are up to.

Is the discord server still active? I'm looking for an invite link but the one here is invalid.

How is everybody doing? I'm in a regular discord game so I am getting my 5th edition fix. The Atlas forums have been busy with discussions of errata. The discord forum has the regular chat, occasionally it's connecting gamers up with open slots in discord games. Project Redcap gets a couple of edits per month. Fanzines - Sub Rosa is getting out a couple of issues a year, Peripheral Code appears to be on hiatus.

Looking here, I see that the troupe tribunal and troupe saga are pretty much dead, and that Stanenges and Rhine Gorge have been dormant for about 11 months.

Anything people want to chat about? Any current plans for more games?

I don't know about Discord, but RPoL has never been a place where Ars magic runs long.

I personally think that this is due to several factors:
- AM is such mechanically diverse and dense system, that its easy for a GM to get overwhelmed, especially if they sandbox it and have a lot of players.
- RPoL is fraught with attrition
- The more player one has, the more the game gets bogged own in opinions and arguments over the rules.

In my opinion, keeping the game membership small, and limited to only the base rulebook (or a small handful of supplements that directly relate to the game one is running) has a better chance of success.
Also, the GM needs a very 'My way, or the highway' hand in the rules:  Keep it simple, and take control.

But thems just my opinion.

Speaking from my limited personal experience I had a difficult time keeping people on the same page since more active players were done with their season in a few posts and others were more or less at the start months into the game.

I do second Galley's advice about limiting players and books. Definitely something I underestimated in my first run; lead to more than one spat.

I'm in the Discord too and getting my fix vicariously there since I have practically zero free time these days.

It seems like PbP is on the decline and games are moving to Discord and the virtual tabletop sites in these pandemic days...  PbP used to be the defacto when people had more hectic schedules and were less available but now that 'work from home' is a far more widespread thing I think that being virtually present during a game is actually possible and desirable.

That makes sense ...

To me playing or Running a game at the same time as working is impossible. I could do one or the other, I may be able to fake working while playing a game but that has problems

I didn't mean work and play simultaneously although I do suspect that may happen for some people on occasion. I just meant that the online availability of people is much higher than it ever has been.  Those without the familiarity with virtual tabletop became familiar through using Zoom from home, the lack of extra wasted time commuting to & from work, those being forced into having the hardware to work through the internet opening up the possibility for using it to game via sites like Roll20, etc...

I think pbp still has its advantages though.  Even with my zoom group I have to carve out a good chunk of time where I can just focus on the game, whereas pbp is good for any time I have a few minutes and a few working brain cells.

But yeah, the slower pace of it is a problem for a medium like this.  And I don't think AM would be a good fit for my zoom group either :(

I have had to use websites/video conferences to replace face to face games until w can get back to that , and that sort of gaming is incompatible with working as would any face to face game.
PBP on any platform which allows a slow pace and no need for response is much more compatible with working and gaming as there are always short gaps and breaks you take and can respond in.
Otherwise apart from work time there has been no increase in my on line availability and for most people I suspect that if they were stuck at home for a few months they will revert to normal going out ASAP.

I agree that I like playing on RPOL because it is much more time flexible. I do not have to synchronize schedules with other players and commit large blocks of time to playing.

I am really getting the itch to play some Ars Magica. Anyone out there willing put something together or breathe new life into a dead game?

In reply to King Jawa (msg # 142):

I'd love to learn it

I'm not up for GMing right now but I would be glad to join a game if someone else wants to put it together.

My own experience of actually playing AM is sadly limited, but I would be glad to join a game if a patient GM who was willing to work with the inexperienced volunteered to run it.

I'd also like to play but I can't be sole GM. I could potentially take on some co-GM responsibilities tho. I have experience.

In reply to Pnvq12 (msg # 146):

Experience is very important in the GMs when players (like me) are inexperienced.

I'm always around and up for a game. Sadly, I've found I just cannot run one these days. I can help with bits (beta SG), but life has been too hectic for me to maintain a game if I'm running it. :(

In reply to King Jawa (msg # 142):

What did you have in mind?

I'd definitely throw in something if a beta SG is desired.

Meanwhile, I think David Chart is collecting more errata.

Tell him about the spot in the core book when they say "beck and call" rather than "beckon call"

In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 151):

That's the correct usage in the book.

Thanks, I hate it.

Anyway I made a game. I'll post an add in a bit. Going to assemble a group then work out the details.

Sir Swindle, you have put a giant smile on my face!

Someone want to go bump our add so that kid can get out of over moderation hell?

Have you all seen this?  Updated 5th ed core book coming soon...

https://atlas-games.com/news/p...-12-anno-magica-2024

I'm personally excited.

In reply to King Jawa (msg # 154):

I look forward to the opportunity to actually play in AM again.

In reply to Dr. Mindermast (msg # 156):

I might actually buy a copy for the first time since 1st edition.

It's definitely going on my list of "things I don't need but will probably spend money on anyway"...

Agreed.

Are they using different art in the new book or is it just and errata-ed reprint?

In reply to witchdoctor (msg # 162):

The ad linked here in Msg. 156 says "new art" and "full color."

Over on the Atlas forums, they created a bunch of threads to ask about art for each chapter, and now they've asked for people's ideas on how the founders are portrayed, so it sounds like at least one new art piece per chapter.

It's definitely not just a reprint with errata. As was mentioned, there will be new art. But there are reasons beyond that that it's not just ArM5 3rd printing. I think that's about all I'm allowed to say, though.