Well, since this didn't make the errata, I suppose it's time for me to ask again:

The rules on studying from summae say:

SUMMAE: SOURCE
Quality and Level

What does this mean? Is the source quality of a summa:
* Quality + Level
* Quality or Level, whichever is higher
* just Quality (the inclusion of Level is a mistake)
* something else I haven't thought of

My bet is on option 3 above, since all those Quality 21, Level 6 magical arts summae in the library examples make most sense that way (just enough to get your Art up to 6 in a season with no waste). But it would be nice to get an official ruling and an errata entry.

Craig Neumeier

you must be referring to p.165 of ArM5, which has its confusing points.
Col 1 describeds books in general, and says that "Summae" *possess* both a Quality scoreand a Level score; and that Summae have a study limit, which is the Summa Level; Tractatus only have a Quality score and no other.
The bit that matters for all these study sources is where the Quality is use: that's on p.163 col 1: "Advancement Total = Source Quality + Bonus from Virtues - Penalty from Flaws"... you can't get much clearer than that: you advance in study (gaining XP) by using the source's Quality. Col. 2 goes on to include "Limits" and point out that some sources: teachers & *summae* have a level and you can't get *any* XP above the level of the source.

back to p.165 - when it comes to specifics on books, col 2 defines the Summa quality and level separately. Col 3 explains it again in prose: each summa is described by 2 factors: its level which represents how much knowledge is contained in it, and its quality which represents how well it is written.

OK - we can argue that the text
"Summae: Source
Quality and Level"

can be read ambiguously - but it's not meant to combine them, just to remind you that as a "Source" (not "Source" is defined, not "Source Quality" or any such) a Summa has two indepenent value...

Finally, in the whole context of this, Col 2 p.165 at the bottom does define Summa fully, and this time uses the same phrase as elsewhere for sources, and says "Summa Source Quality".

Phew!

Here's how I think it should have been written, in order to parallel all the other examples of Source Quality for x.p. calculations:

SUMMA SOURCE QUALITY:
Quality

SUMMA STUDY LIMIT:
Limit

TRACTATUS SOURCE QUALITY:
Quality

On the face of it, however, that's not what it says. There's several other examples of Source Qualities where you add factors together, so it's not out of line to imagine that's what "Quality and Level" should mean. In fact, I would say that this is the most logical reading. I just think it's probably wrong.

Craig Neumeier, LHN

Interesting... I have never imagined that a Summae's Source Quality was anything BUT Level + Quality.

Thus, in 5th ed, a Level 12, Quality 7 Text would give 19 XP for that Art each season, until you reach 12 in that Art.

In 4th ed, a Magus got to add Int and Concentration to the Text's Quality, so it could conceivably be a decent total for an older Magus, when he/she needs it to raise 20-to-21 in an Art.

I saw this 5th ed change as being a trade off for the fact that Vis is now suck-tastic for studies. The intent of 5th ed, so far as I could decipher, was to have Magi grow fairly powerful fairly quickly, but then that would taper off and increases above 20 would take forever.

If the actual Rule is that Summae give only Quality in XP for a season of Study... ... *shudder* ... ... time for a House Rule.

Mr. Nephew... any comments?
J.

The rate of experience point gain was decreased on purpose in fifth edition. I'm certain that an xp gain of quality alone was the intention of the rules.

In fourth edition, magi characters grew beyond the comfortable reach of the rules and setting in about 4 decades. If you don't run games that take place over long periods of time and you don't involve older magi I don't anticipate you'll find any real problems in using fourth edition study rules (I don't see much justification for using quality + level for summas).

Yes and No... I can see where you are coming from, but I find it hard to believe that Players could be happy with such a slow rate of advancement. We have several House Rules for just those reasons... to suit my groups style of Play.

I personally get the most enjoyment out of the early stages of an ArM Saga, when the "baby-mages" are fresh out of their Gauntlet and things are actually challenging. However, after a while the things that challenge baby-mages start to get a little repetitive and so the Saga morphs into a more politically charged campaign... which requires the PCs to be able to hold their own against other Magi.

Not necessarily in combat, but at least in relative power for Certamen, or to be able to impress their sodalis with their power and potence. Besides, in any politics you risk Wizard's War, and then you DO need the combative power.

So 5th ed is saying "Re-think your image of how powerful the Primus of House Flambeau really is?"

Like I mentioned, the limits of Summae Level and the newfound impotence of Vis Study put an effective cap on any quick increases. The difference between Gauntlet+0 Magi and Gauntlet+10 year Magi would be vast, but the difference between Gauntlet+20 year Magi and Gauntlet+30 year Magi would be much less so. This is the point at which the Magi are able to hold their own against other Magi, where baby-mages never could.

Gaining approximately 6 XP for a season of study, Vis or Summa, a Character would take 5 1/2 years to get to a 20 in their favorite Art (starting from a 12 out of the Gauntlet). I'm curious if other SG's have players who embrace this concept?

I'll admit, I haven't started a 5th ed Saga yet, but the 4 primary figures in our future Campaign have already discussed 5th ed, and translated the Characters from the beginnings of our aborted last Saga. Vis and Studies were the two primary concerns.

By the time a Flambeau can Multicast Mastered Balls of Abyssmal Flame, if I am still writing stories about bug-hunts in Faerie Forests then I have missed something somewhere. The same thing with stories dealing with nosy/troublesome Nobles... those are for the early days of a Saga, and then they go away except for specifc events that need to be dealt with.

The later years of a Saga are for Magi-on-Magi conflict, Politics at Tribunal, making Enchanted Items of awesome power, and dealing with the obligatory Diabolists. All these require Power, and most Players don't want to wait till their Characters are 100 years old to start.

Of course, it _IS_ always fun to kill Faeries, but that's just my opinion.

Sorry for the wordiness... I'm a writer. :-/
J.

Two objections:

1) All those Quality 21, Level 6 summae in the laboratory examples. Quality 21 is exactly enough to get you to level 6 in one season of study. This is the main reason for my preferred interpretation: it's hard to imagine any other reason for most magi to choose those particular numbers for their library texts.

2) If the right total is Quality + Level, it is not clear why the rule for lowering Level to gain Quality exists at all, since there's no actual advantage to doing it (for Arts, anyway).

Craig Neumeier, LHN

//... which requires the PCs to be able to hold their own against other Magi.

Not necessarily in combat, but at least in relative power for Certamen, or to be able to impress their sodalis with their power and potence. Besides, in any politics you risk Wizard's War, and then you DO need the combative power.//

The old magi in ArM5 are less powerful than they were in ArM4, and hence you can also reduce the advancement rate of younger magi without unbalancing the campaign world.
ArM4 actually made it very difficult for young magi in newly founded covenants to catch up with their elders and their protegés, because the established covenants - if their magi were advanced by the same rules as the young ones - would have had Summae of level 45 to 50 and beyond for every Art: a tremendous advantage.

//So 5th ed is saying "Re-think your image of how powerful the Primus of House Flambeau really is?"//

Exactly.

Kind regards,

Berengar

////So 5th ed is saying "Re-think your image of how powerful the Primus of House Flambeau really is?"////

//Exactly. //

Wow. What a hideous concept. I can feel several of my Players rolling over in their graves, if they had one yet.

I still love ArM. Johnathon Tweet and That-Other-Fellow-Who-Doesn't-Count-Anymore did a wonderful thing when they thought up this game. I'm glad it's still alive and kicking and being taken care of by people who respect it. But I have the feeling that ArM 4.5 ed will swiftly be defined by my Players.

------------

So, a general question to the Forum: Do other Storyguides have groups of Players who embrace the concept of such limited studies?

------------

And I mean EMBRACE... "This is exactly what we've been waiting for!!!"...not just grumbling acceptance of the changes to the game.

Vote now! Satisfy a total stranger's curiousity!
Thanks,
J.

I don't have the same group of players that i had in any of my fourth edition games.

Of my fourth edition games, the game that ran the longest was set in a winter covenant. There were three obsessed twilight ridden magi left in the shattered remains of the covenent they were 65, 110 (who was barely funtional due to twilight), and 90 years of age.

The players could not hope to ever compare to these characters in any reasonable way. The existence of these characters realy damaged the game because they mad ethe PC's less important.

If we would have been playing fifth edition things wouldn't have been so bad.

Many of the fans of second and third edition were very dissapointed with the high speed of advancement in fourth edition. Fifth edition splits the difference. Advancement doesn't stop dead at level 20 like it did in previous editions of the game, but at the same time there are less "vis study art score explosions". In my opinion (just an opinion and just mine) this is the best of both worlds.

Tractatus that are created by the rest of your coveneant will average around quality six.

Using the covenent creation rules you can (and probably will) get tractatus at quality 10. The theretical highest level tractatus would be quality 14 (com +5 and good teacher virtue). The practical high quality will be 9 or 12 (+3 com or good teacher or +3 com and good teacher). These are the sort of tractatus that will be copied and traded for. As a result I think that the average quality for a tractatus should be around 8 if you get half of them from your covenant and half from trade.

Summa study should be somewhat higher for levels fifteen and lower because of the quality bonus for high scores. A character with level 40 in an art* will recieve a +10 quality bonus when writing a level 10 summa and a +5 bonus for a level 15 summa. It's tough to come up with a scenario that doesn't have at least a handful of level 15 quality 15 summas and level 10 quality 20 summas being availible to the order. I'd imagine that there might be a few level 20 quality 20 and level 25 quality 15 books out there.

So I think that your estimation of six xp per season of study is low.

*A character who has an affinity in a particular art and who gets an average of 10 base xp a year (15 when adjusted for their affinity) will get to art level 40, 55 years after thier gauntlet.

//The players could not hope to ever compare to these characters in any reasonable way. The existence of these characters realy damaged the game.//

Hmmmm... if/when my next saga gets started, I plan on having 3 elder magi much like you describe. However, the Covenant is by no means shattered, and the elder Magi just know that it needs fresh blood to avoid the slide into Winter.

I have found that having older, guiding hands keeps the baby-mages from being too rambunctious, while at the same time forcing other Covenants to give the PC-Covenant some respect. I've used the Elder Magi concept in two other Saga's, and had no problems other than Players grumbling about having to sneak around when they wanted to be rambunctious... just like I wanted.

I'll admit, there are some background aspects of my campaign that are not Canon, but I don't think I've ever GM'ed any game where I stuck with Canon.

//In my opinion (just an opinion) this is the best of both worlds.//

My problem with 4th ed was not the quickness of advancement, but the open ended nature of it. With Vis, a Magus need never stop studying.

What I saw in 5th ed, using the method in which I interpreted the rules, Young Magi could quickly advance to the 15-20 range in several Arts. However, because Texts are written at 1/2 of your Art Score, it would seem that Level 20 was a practical top for a Text's Level (requiring a 40 in an Art). 25's and the rare 30 would exist, and be hard to get access to.

So, after exhausting a normal library, the younger Magi would be left with the new Vis-study rules. Stress Die, averaging about 6 with explosions, plus aura (3-4-5 or so)... call it 10 XP in trade for 3-4 Pawns of Vis, or more. Even with an Affinity it now takes 2 or more seasons to gain a level in an Art. And you can only have two Affinities. Even the most monomaniacal Magus will need to eventually find something else to Study.

Thus, Art Scores (Affinity or not) would level out around the 20 Range, but it wouldn't take toooooo long for the Magi to get there. To paraphrase one of my players: "Ars Magica doesn't really get crunchy until you can get a Lab Total of 50 or so." Remember, by this point I have quit running stories where the Magi are arguing with Nobles or chasing down Sprites for their Vis.

In addition, I have one Player whose Bonisagus is dead-set on making a significant "Discovery." Even using our abbreviated take on the rules laid out in the Wizard's Grimoire, This was going to take a 25+ in every Art to make the necessary connections. So that's a total of 4875 XP for 15 Arts, minus the 180+ from Creation (with Affinities), and he is looking at 117 years (at 10 XP per Season) before he can get started on a process which will take 30+ years to finish (my plot-esque figuring).

That's a hard sell.

//So I think that your estimation of six xp per season is low.//

I agree... I pulled that out of my tuckus in shock, more than actual statistical consideration.

So, I've got one Vote of "Yes, it's what I was looking for." Am I the only dissenter? ^_o

Maybe my next poll should be: "Does this Scotsman185 dillweed talk too much?" :-)
J.

// ////So 5th ed is saying "Re-think your image of how powerful the Primus of House Flambeau really is?"////

//Exactly. //

Wow. What a hideous concept. ...//

You are aware that a Flambeau in ArM4 would need at least the stats of David Chart's Showoffica from Hermes Portal 3 (the one with Tatzlwurm Familiar and CrIg Lab Total of 110) to succeed Tertious? Just wondering ...

Kind regards,

Berengar

//... I have one Player whose Bonisagus is dead-set on making a significant "Discovery." Even using our abbreviated take on the rules laid out in the Wizard's Grimoire, ...//

Clearly ArM5 advancement and ArM4 WGRE discovery rules do not match. I expect completely different rules for discoveries in the ArM5 Grimoire.

Kind regards,

Berengar

//You are aware that a Flambeau in ArM4 would need at least the stats
//... ... ... Just wondering

Hmmmm... not necessarily. Remember, this is a House whose members are famous for dying young, right after uttering the Phrase "Hey, Sodalis, watch this!"

Depending on the nature of a given Saga, an "old" Flambeau may be 30 years out of Gauntlet.

So... should I put you down as a "Yes, this is Exactly..." vote? :-)
J.

"I have found that having older, guiding hands keeps the baby-mages from being too rambunctious, while at the same time forcing other Covenants to give the PC-Covenant some respect. I've used the Elder Magi concept in two other Saga's, and had no problems other than Players grumbling about having to sneak around when they wanted to be rambunctious... just like I wanted."

My issue was that the players believed (rightly or not) that the oldsters would pull their bacon out of the fire if they ever really got into too much trouble. As a result they were always less worried than they might otherwise have been. The players also believed that two of the three were just crazy enough to squash them like bugs and as a result they were never as daring as they could have been.

I'm heartened that it worked well for you.

"So, after exhausting a normal library, the younger Magi would be left with the new Vis-study rules. Stress Die, averaging about 6 with explosions, plus aura (3-4-5 or so)... call it 10 XP in trade for 3-4 Pawns of Vis, or more. Even with an Affinity it now takes 2 or more seasons to gain a level in an Art. And you can only have two Affinities. Even the most monomaniacal Magus will need to eventually find something else to Study."

remember that you can always commission , borrow, or steal more tractatuses. But for the most part I agree with your analysis.

"So, I've got one Vote of "Yes, it's what I was looking for." Am I the only dissenter? ^_o"

That's just me remember, I can't speak for the folks who played in the same games that I did.

"Maybe my next poll should be: "Does this Scotsman185 dillweed talk too much?" :-)"

I'd bet that most people who read this list share my opinion that it recieves too little traffic, not too much.

////You are aware that a Flambeau in ArM4 would need at least the stats
//... ... ... Just wondering

Hmmmm... not necessarily. Remember, this is a House whose members are famous for dying young, right after uttering the Phrase "Hey, Sodalis, watch this!"

Depending on the nature of a given Saga, an "old" Flambeau may be 30 years out of Gauntlet.//

YMMV, but I just stuck to canon and used the Primus Tertious from HoH p. 55 as a measure of age and power: "..., an old and crafty master of destruction magic. He is a pontifex in Doissetep, a rank that denotes years of extraordinary service to the covenant. ... Tertious is consolidating his power in House Flambeau through shows of political force and generosity. For now, anyway, he supports other Flambeau magi rather than directing or commanding them. If he is true to the training at Doissetep, however, he has ulterior motives at which no one can guess."
The power of old magi developed by the advancement rules in ArM4 should be known latest after the covenant project from 2002, whose results you can still download from http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/covenant50.zip and http://www.atlas-games.com/pdf_storage/covenant150.zip. (And it is certainly no coincidence that Showoffica made her appearance just when that project had been started.)

//So... should I put you down as a "Yes, this is Exactly..." vote? :-)//
I am of the opinion that arguments on a message board should be weighed, not counted.

Kind regards,

Berengar

//YMMV, but I just stuck to canon //

"Canon... they're more just guidelines, you see."
(paraphrased from a popular movie featuring a heroin using pirate.)

//The power of old magi developed by the advancement rules in ArM4 should be known latest after the covenant project from 2002//

Yes, I've seen those... the main thing I learned from reading the 50-year covenant entries was that the homegrown formula that I was using for creating the art scores of NPC Magi was OVERpowering them compared to using the rules.

Oddly enough, these overpowered Magi Populating my world never seemed to negatively impact my Sagas, but I realize that's just our style of play.

//I am of the opinion that arguments on a message board should be weighed, not counted. //

Right... so I'll weigh you in on the side of "That's what I wanted."

I am of the opinion that discussions on a message board should be taken less seriously. ;-)

In all fairness, I sort-of-apologize for that last statement. However, all I'm trying to do is find out if our style of play is so different from others in the ArM Community. Input would be appreciated, from all and sundry.

Sorry to highjack your thread, Mr. CJNeum, but it just sort of evolved this way. My next rant will have a thread all of its own, I promise... tune in soon!

J.

> Mr. Nephew... any comments?

Only that I'm so not qualified to answer a technical question like this. We need to hope that David stops by soon. :)

Thanks for even replying... I was referencing you in much the same way as talking to a Deity. LOL

However, since the Godhead has put in an appearance... I must oooh and ahhh over your response. Such eloquence, such clarity, such verismilitude.

*tuckus kissing continues for several more minutes*

Now, can I get a free copy of the next Supplement?
...
..
.
I didn't think so, but it's always worth a shot. Keep up the good work, O Grand Administrator, and I look forward to the Rhine Tribunal book. :-)

//The rules are the same as for everything else: Advancement Total is based only on Source Quality, not level. //

Thus is it clarified. However, we have already resolved ourselves to stripping the flesh off the bones of 5th ed and pretty much carrying on as always.

Much like I remember previous pirahna attacks on your website for House Rules, story ideas and such. LOL

Keep up the good work, Sir, and I hope you get many more chances to disappoint me with official rules in many more supplements. :-)