I have this really difficult troupe of players...

Now they came up with an idea that character advancement rules are not good. They don't like the idea of having the year divided in only four periods (i.e. seasons). They suggested that it should be divided at least into 12 periods, so that instead of measuring time in seasons we'd be measuring time in months.

I wouldn't have changed the rules if they hadn't said anything, but now that they have, I might do that. After all, it is kind of funny if a character wants to study only, say, one level of imaginem (that would take couple of weeks for a character with zero in imaginem and a good summa) and then spend the rest of season studying something else, and then I would have to say that "you can't do that, since studying a summa takes a season and if you want to study first imaginem and then something else, that'll take at least two seasons". It would be better if the character could spend a month studying imaginem and then the rest two months studying, say, area lore.

I have discussed this quite much with my troupe, but I'd like to know if you've done something like this and what kind of experiences have you had.

Thanks in advance.

There were rules like this for ArM4 in the Triamore supplement.

One campaign I know of did really plan to use a modified version of these rules a few years ago. They never carried through with it, though, because they never found the time to do the detailed book-keeping needed.
Before you put effort into such a more detailed advancement system for ArM5, my advice is to charge the player most vocally demanding it with its session by session application, verification and tracking.

Kind regards,

Berengar

I would shy away from changing the rules for study from seasons to months. The players just need to buy into the idea that knowledge does take longer to acquire than they first thought.

There's nothing stopping a direct translation of the word season to month but in my opinion, once you do that, you start to lose some of the grand scale of an Ars Magica saga.

Saga's are generally designed around the idea that the magi and the covenant matures over years; the outside world changes around them and they must find their way within that changing landscape.

If your players feel they want quicker advancement, then given them a few seasons or even years between stories. They'll get to where they want to be and you'll preserve the scale of the saga by letting them experience the passage of time.

I think it is essentially a mindset that needs to be acquired. We are taking a short break from Ars at the moment to play a D20 Eberron scenario. After one or two sessions I went up a level. That felt really quick to me, but would be completely expected by others more used to that paradigm.

Remember though, whatever you choose to do, keep it fun.

Mark

Philosophically, the passage of time was felt differently by medieval folk before the invention of the clock. Time passing was measured primarily upon nature's greater manifestations.. i.e dawn/dusk, change of weather, etc...

Although a working calendar and the concept of months did exist in the medieval paradigm, it wasn't until Descartes' clock theory (which created an abstract model of the universe that broke EVERYTHING down to working parts of a grand machine, a giant clock; nature is above all else, a machine, like a clock; there are no ‘occult’ or mysterious forces at work)

Before Descartes(1596) natural phenomena, such as the passing of "time" were not mechanical and material; Medieval society did not view and measure time into concepts that abstracted phases of the moon and other physical signs that were not readily apparent. Natural phenomena was instead dictated by the whim of the gods; in other words, the moon rose only because there was a mystical force behind it. (call it God or the Fey)

To better grasp the medieval mind and it's idea of "time", think of it as a straight LINEAR line, where EVERYTHING has a beginning and end, (the "end", the final reward, being the ultimate day off and NOT the ultimate off day) instead of the CIRCULAR cyclic paradigm used today.

I hope this makes sense : )

I wouldn't change the overall time period for work from months to seasons, as that would affect other things such as lab work. There's also the problem of studying from vis - it requires a certain amount per season studied. You could keep the study breakdown in seasons and have a house rule for studying from books, though, based off the ArM5 rules of interrupted seasons for studying books. You could say that for every month of study in a book you get 1/3 of the Quality in points to apply to the art. That way somebody could study up to 3 different arts in one season from books. If each of the books had quality 15, they could get 5 xp in each art.

If they're studying from vis, you could allow them 1/3 of the study total for each month of study, but require a full season's worth of vis for each art they study. For example, if they have level 7 in 3 different arts which they want to study in one season, they would have to use 2 pawns of vis each month for studying the one art (same as if they studied it for the full season), but only get 1/3 of the study total for studying it only a month. If they studied one of the arts for 2 months, they'd get 2/3 of the study total for the 2 vis. Overall it would be a more efficient use of vis to study one art for a full season, and the person breaking up study like this might get a reputation as a vis waster.

"You could say that for every month of study in a book you get 1/3 of the Quality in points to apply to the art. That way somebody could study up to 3 different arts in one season from books. If each of the books had quality 15, they could get 5 xp in each art."

I have had something like that in my mind. It wouldn't be too difficult to allow studying, say, three different arts from summae. But how about if a character wants to study a given summa for a month and then open an invested device for enchantments. That takes a whole season, and the character has already spent 1/3 of the season reading a book. Or should I just state that opening a device takes three months, instead of saying it takes a season.

If you use the Distractions rule from page 165, you can split a season into three months for advancement and writing totals.

Regard,
Adumbratus

//If it's not too much, could you please explain to me the rules presented in the Triamore supplement? I don't have that book.//

Please understand that this is not possible. The alternate advancement rules from Triamore fill some 5 pages, and that supplement is still on sale.

Kind regards,

Berengar