In another thread (http://www.therpgsite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2011) people were talking trash about Ars Magica, mostly (as far as I could tell) on the basis of it being historically inaccurate. I have little idea of what they're talking about: I wasn't aware that Ars Magica /had/ a setting beyond, "it's the year whatever, except there's this society of mages, and faeries and magical animals exist."
So, what's so bad about Ars Magica? Let's hear it!
I think AM is fine for what it is.
I do not, however, buy into the mantra of those who whip it out whenever the topic "what should I use to run my generic fantasy game" comes up. AM has a specific set of setting assumptions that fit best for the sort of game that is about a covenant of mages.
Ars has a detailed medieval setting during the year 1220, IMO it is a tremendous rpg, including the new edition.
That said, it is mythic Europe, not actual Europe, it is Europe as its inhabitants believed it to be along with faeries, demons, angels and so on.
That said, I own a lot of Ars books and I know a fair bit about the Albigensian crusade, and its treatment in those books looked more than accurate enough for gaming purposes to me. It is, after all, a game rather than an academic treatise.
Quote from: Caesar SlaadI think AM is fine for what it is.
I do not, however, buy into the mantra of those who whip it out whenever the topic "what should I use to run my generic fantasy game" comes up. AM has a specific set of setting assumptions that fit best for the sort of game that is about a covenant of mages.
I agree, it's not at all generic. It works well for medieval gaming, but I would hesitate to use it for anything very far from that concept.
It would probably work for Harn, which is essentially medieval anyway, but not for anything more generic than that.
That said, I have run a lengthy AM campaign with no magi at all, so it does do it, but you need to keep it rooted in historicity for the game really to work properly.
I can imagine that a lot of people feel intimidated by real-world settings. If you make a decision about some background stuff in, let's say Greyhawk, it might not be according to the official version, but you feel empowered enough to make your own decisions.
When playing in fantasy Europe, Caesarian Rome or the court of Louis XIV, you're basically 'changing history' if you get some fact about the sewer system wrong. That 'feels' worse to a lot of game masters. And a lot of gamers are history geeks. If you get something wrong, you'll hear it -- or worse, get that tooth-ache look...
This being a Europe where wizards run rampant doesn't change that as much. Nobody cares if you get the relations of the Houses of Hermes wrong, but make one false statement about three-field crop rotation...
Personally, I never took a fancy to the troupe style of playing. This bothers me enough in bog standard fantasy with its familiars and torch bearers, but in Ars Magica it's basically neccesary.
Apart from that, Ars Magica is nice to steal from. Good setting information, a very usable magic system (easily transported to almost any system) and neat adventures (Covenant of Calebais is especially recommended).
Quote from: SosthenesApart from that, Ars Magica is nice to steal from. Good setting information, a very usable magic system (easily transported to almost any system) and neat adventures (Covenant of Calebais is especially recommended).
Yes, exactly. The Houses of Hermes makes for a fantastic example of a magical organization. I also felt some of the example covenants in the Covenants sourcebook were cool enough to use on their own. The Broken Covenant of Calebais is, indeed, an interesting adventure. Very well-done, and really is a dungeon with a lot of thought behind it.
I haven't read 5th edition so it might have improved, but I found the combat system for non-mages was rather boring, pretty much taking turns rolling dice. To me that made it not very portable to a campaign where mages weren't the focus.
But it's fine for its intended purpose.
If I remember correctly, Rune's combat system was based on AM. That could lead to some interesting cross-overs. Replace wizards with druids and vikings with celtic warriors...
Why nothing, its near perfect except not being leather bound and full color!
Ars Magica is of course one of my favorite games it does its thing well, without a lot of wasted space or useless aspects. To be fair its not for everyone and I'd never recommend it for a "generic" fantasy. It simply is too focused on magic and mages. On the other hand with a few minor tweaks the game is quite good at other things. I know the system loosely adapted was used in RUNE, and a few people enjoyed that as well.
I luv Ars Magica. Nothing but luv.
Quote from: SosthenesI can imagine that a lot of people feel intimidated by real-world settings. If you make a decision about some background stuff in, let's say Greyhawk, it might not be according to the official version, but you feel empowered enough to make your own decisions.
When playing in fantasy Europe, Caesarian Rome or the court of Louis XIV, you're basically 'changing history' if you get some fact about the sewer system wrong. That 'feels' worse to a lot of game masters. And a lot of gamers are history geeks. If you get something wrong, you'll hear it -- or worse, get that tooth-ache look...
This being a Europe where wizards run rampant doesn't change that as much. Nobody cares if you get the relations of the Houses of Hermes wrong, but make one false statement about three-field crop rotation...
That's exactly why I steer clear of anything but the most of pseudo- of pseudo-historical games. I'm not a historian and I feel underqualified and lame when running something historical.
QuotePersonally, I never took a fancy to the troupe style of playing. This bothers me enough in bog standard fantasy with its familiars and torch bearers, but in Ars Magica it's basically neccesary.
I would
adore a D&D campaign run troupe style, where people take turns running all the cohorts, followers, animal companions, etc.
Ars Magica is a relentlessly fantastic game. From character construction to the magic system to the running of the alliance to the troupe-style play it's easily one of the greatest RPGs ever written.
My only regret about it is that I've only ever played a handful of adventures and have never really been able to make the most of the more innovative pieces of design.
Quote from: jrientsI would adore a D&D campaign run troupe style, where people take turns running all the cohorts, followers, animal companions, etc.
It's an idea I've kicked around. The "main PCs" (equivalent to Ars Magica magi in relative power) could use the Gestalt rules from Unearthed Arcana, the companion PCs could use the normal D&D rules, and grogs could use the NPC classes (warrior especially).
Its a pity most of you don't read Spanish; otherwise if you wanted a really good and AUTHENTIC look at a Medieval Historical RPG complete with a magic system that actually bases itself on how magic was imagined to work by the medieval world view, I would recommend Aquelarre. On this issue, it kicks Ars Magica's ass on so many levels.
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPunditIts a pity most of you don't read Spanish; otherwise if you wanted a really good and AUTHENTIC look at a Medieval Historical RPG complete with a magic system that actually bases itself on how magic was imagined to work by the medieval world view, I would recommend Aquelarre. On this issue, it kicks Ars Magica's ass on so many levels.
Well, I would say that if you're looking for an authentic medieval historical RPG, then you shouldn't play Ars Magica.
What I've heard of Aquelarre is that it sets up an opposition between rationality and magic -- that you have a rationality/irrationality stat, and the higher your rationality, the more resistant you are to magic but the less able to cast it you are. Is that true? Offhand, that sounds much more modern than medieval to me, which conjures up a picture of a magic/science division.
I don't know offhand of an English-language game which does period medieval magic. I used Norse Seidhr magic in my Vinland campaign, which is period medieval (circa ~1000). I have my notes here:
http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/vinland/magic/
Quote from: RPGPunditIts a pity most of you don't read Spanish; otherwise if you wanted a really good and AUTHENTIC look at a Medieval Historical RPG complete with a magic system that actually bases itself on how magic was imagined to work by the medieval world view, I would recommend Aquelarre. On this issue, it kicks Ars Magica's ass on so many levels.
It has been translated into French and I thought it was pretty poor. Nice atmosphere but the rest is really amateur-hour.
Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalIt has been translated into French and I thought it was pretty poor. Nice atmosphere but the rest is really amateur-hour.
I also own the English translation, which was never authorised for general release.
No point here, I just felt like gloating rather.
Quote from: BalbinusNo point here, I just felt like gloating rather.
Well La-Dee-Dah Mr. Well-Connected! How did you get that?
Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalWell La-Dee-Dah Mr. Well-Connected! How did you get that?
My natural sexual magnetism.
Actually, I don't entirely recall how I got to know the guy, but somehow I got in email contact with the translator.
That said, I wouldn't understimate the impact of the natural sexual magnetism.
Quote from: jhkimWell, I would say that if you're looking for an authentic medieval historical RPG, then you shouldn't play Ars Magica.
What I've heard of Aquelarre is that it sets up an opposition between rationality and magic -- that you have a rationality/irrationality stat, and the higher your rationality, the more resistant you are to magic but the less able to cast it you are. Is that true? Offhand, that sounds much more modern than medieval to me, which conjures up a picture of a magic/science division.
What I was really referring to was the kind of "spells" and monsters involved in it, that all come straight out of medieval spanish folklore.
But the Rationality/Irrationality system is actually QUITE medieval. What it isn't is early modern.
You see, in the medieval period, before the black death/renaissance/reformation/counterreformation, the view of magic held by the erudite catholic church was quite different than later on. Medieval scholars believed that magic didn't exist, that it was an illusion, that devil-worshipers or witches were certainly heretics, but that magical power was all based on lies and self-delusions, and a lack of "rationality".
On the other hand, of course, less educated people believed it to be utterly real and a part of the world.
It was only later, after the black death and during the "witch craze", that the paradigm changed to believe that lucifer could grant people real powers to affect the real world.
So the rationality/irrationality mechanic actually works quite well to simulate educated/uneducated thought on the matter in that time period.
RPGPundit
Quote from: BalbinusThat said, I wouldn't understimate the impact of the natural sexual magnetism.
I would... if I were you.
Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalI would... if I were you.
You think I'm underestimating it? That the impact is even greater than I realise? I suppose that's possible...
Quote from: RPGPunditIts a pity most of you don't read Spanish; otherwise if you wanted a really good and AUTHENTIC look at a Medieval Historical RPG complete with a magic system that actually bases itself on how magic was imagined to work by the medieval world view, I would recommend Aquelarre. On this issue, it kicks Ars Magica's ass on so many levels.
I agree in full with the Pundit. I have some pet peeves with the system, but are small details. The magic system reeks authenticity, and it has a quick and easy system. The supplements are top - notch regarding background info and bringing medieval legends alive.
Quote from: ImperatorI agree in full with the Pundit.
Then you've lost the right to the title of "Swiney McSwine".
RPGPundit
Oh, boy, I liked it a lot.... :(
;)
Did they ever come out with a spanish version of Nephilim? I remember when I worked on a Nephilim fanzine back in the day the company involved said they'd send me a copy but it never appeared.
Quote from: Mr. AnalyticalDid they ever come out with a spanish version of Nephilim? I remember when I worked on a Nephilim fanzine back in the day the company involved said they'd send me a copy but it never appeared.
Yes. It was a translation from the original French book from Multisim, which in my opinion was a mistake (I also have the Chaosium ed and I think it's vastly superior). But the publishers of Nephilim in Spain (Joc Internacional) are different people from the AM Spanish publishers (Kerykion first, Distrimagen after them).
Yeah... French version was a bit all over the place.
Well, I have to admit that I am Mr. Stafford's bitch, so I love everyhting he works in :D. But yes, the book is better organized, explained, and the supplements count with people like Kenneth Hite working on it. However, the French supplements are very cool, specially Selenim.
On topic: I love Ars Magica.
I bear no ill will toward Ars Magica, but I never really enjoyed the troupe style of gaming for a number of personal reasons, among them that it seemed like it was hard for the people I played with to become attached to any of the characters when we played this way.
That being said, I really liked the way the game was written, the quality of the supplements and background material, and the magic system.
It was a truly novel game, especially for the time that it came out.
I'd probably pick it up again if I found a cheap, used copy.
Quote from: mattormegI'd probably pick it up again if I found a cheap, used copy.
You have something against PDFs, then? The fourth edition is available for free, you know.