Hi all,

I come to suspect I'm in the minority when it comes to my fondness for hedge magic traditions and their role in Ars Magica. However, I'm a bit unclear on why there is such vehemence at times regarding any attempt to spotlight them or provide PC or NPC hedge mages with power levels similar to that of Hermetics.

Please enlighten me.

Do your Sagas just tend to be heavily Hermetically focussed?

Is it merely a general dislike?

If not, why don't you like SPECIFIC hedgies?

Are there problems with hedge magic mechanics? If so, what specifically is broken?

Please save vitriol for another time and place - I'm mainly interested in what could be done to rehabilitate them into an integral part of Ars Magica.

Regards,

Jarkman

I like hedge wizards. I use them pretty extensively in my campaigns as NPCs. I do not allow PC hedge wizards simply because I feel that defeats the purpose of having such an elegant magical system. I feel there is plenty of variance and depth within the existing Order and the myriad options available to a player that they should be able to develop a worthy character without having to strive for a degree of uniqueness that requires different mechanics of play. I even frown upon Ex Miscellanea PCs unless the character is sufficiently "Hermeticized".

As NPCs, I treat hedge wizards in the same light as creatures. I determine their "fields" of study (i.e. their tradition), determine their methodology (i.e. whether it is ritualistic spellcasting, spontaneous magic, potions, etc.), and then decide on what effects they are capable of. As mundanes, I don't utilize powers and Might points for them, but I base it on the same concepts. For instance, I give them the powers I want them to have and don't pay much heed to how that power would be duplicated Hermetically.

My general opinion is that a hedge wizard should be more powerful in his field of study than a Hermetic magus of equivalent "age" (apprentice vs. apprentice, master vs. master, etc.), but should lack the versatility offered by Hermetic magic. Also, I believe the Parma Magica is a key ability that should not be trivialized by giving hedge wizards something similar, but not quite as good, etc.

I like the idea of Hermetic Theory as a universal theory of magic, in that every magical phenomenon can be quantified and replicated by Hermetic magi. Thus, in my sagas, all hedge magic can (eventually) be incorporated into Hermetic Theory. In the meantime, there is a world of mystery for the magi to explore.

Thanks for the comment Nzld, sorry for the lateness of reply.

Your comment on not liking different mechanics is a valid point - do any others share it?

NPC hedge wizards as stand alone encounters seem fairly easy to create and I agree that modelling them on a Might paradigm doesn't work, but do you have an example perhaps of what you mean by not worrying about how the power is duplicated Hermetically?

I'd be interested in an example of one of your adversary hedgies, if only to promote discussion about them and see what others dislike about current hedgies.

I agree that Parma should be a core Order of Hermes ability. The line editor has even convinced me that hedgies don't need "general" MR in ArM5, although I didn't lie down softly I'll admit.

All hedge magic can be incorporated into Hermetic magic one day, eh?

"String" theory Ars Magica style ?

Jarkman

//Your comment on not liking different mechanics is a valid point - do any others share it?//

I can't speak for others. I think that some people's concept of hedge magic is that hedge wizards are technically just Ex Miscellanea magi that haven't joined House Ex Miscellanea, yet, and thus model them on the same mechanics as Hermetic magi. I don't agree with that. In my opinion, the Ex Miscellnea rules provided in the rules are for those, as I mentioned previously, that have been "Hermeticized", perhaps by working with House Bonisagus, etc. True hedge wizards may indeed be members of House Ex Miscellanea, but they are not modeled simply by giving them Art scores and Hermetic Virtues & Flaws that "illustrate" their tradition.

Now, contrary to my statement about different mechanics, I do believe that if you are going to devise a mechanic for hedge wizards, it should follow the methods already shown in Ars Magic supplements, such as Shamans, The Maleficium, etc. This typically seems to involve creating about 3 to 5 "techniques" that govern what the hedge wizard can do. In Shamans, for example, the shamanic individuals had Control, Alter, and Travel (there may have been a fourth one, I can't remember exactly; Summon, perhaps). Goetists in The Maleficium derived scores for things like Summon, Bind, Banish, etc. (once again, I apologize for any inaccuracies here... it's the point that is important).

This allows you to utilize them with some consistentcy with the core rule mechanics for dice rolls, botches, etc. This is great if the hedge tradition will play a tremendous role in your saga, or if you plan to allow a PC to investigate and pursue it, etc. I do not feel it is necessary for every hedge wizard you come across.

//NPC hedge wizards as stand alone encounters seem fairly easy to create and I agree that modelling them on a Might paradigm doesn't work, but do you have an example perhaps of what you mean by not worrying about how the power is duplicated Hermetically?//

This is simple SG's fiat in practice. Similar to how the 5th Edition rules describe the design of creature powers, I choose the ability I want the hedge wizard to have, but don't try to figure out what Technigue-Form combination that would involve, or what Level of effect it would be. That is irrelevent in the grand scheme of things. I determine what Form(s) can resist the effect, for Parma considerations, but that is all. Rather than useing Might points to "power" their powers, however, I try to base it on concepts similar to Hermetic magic, such as fatigue, charges, etc.

//I'd be interested in an example of one of your adversary hedgies, if only to promote discussion about them and see what others dislike about current hedgies.//

The most recent hedge wizard encounter in my saga was with a character I called Ursula of the Snakes. Her concept was a simple pagan-witch with a taint of the Infernal. Though she was not an "evil" character, she was sufficiently "dark" due to the Infernal influence in her magic (though she had little knowledge of the true nature of her "imps" and "familiars"). Her primary powers lay in calling forth spirits to work her will, mingled with traditional concepts of herbalism. I based her concept on the Natural Magician in the Hedge Magic sourcebook and the Theurgy mystery in The Mysteries. She could not technically cast spells, but she could perform rituals that would call forth spirits, and could then bind them into potions, totems, etc. The encounter with Ursula was intended for information gathering, not combat. Defensively, however, she had a servitor demon bound to her that would protect her should the characters choose to attack.

Her price for the information was a pint of blood from a magus. Obviously the characters were hesitant to agree to that, but they negotiated to provide the blood of the magus they were seeking. To insure their compliance, one of the PC magi had to submit to a "geas". I didn't bother to work up what the geas would entail because it wouldn't come into play unless the magus failed to fulfill his end of the bargain. This didn't occur. As far as the game went, he simply had to drink a nasty concoction she brewed up and Whallah! geased!

If your curious, snakes were like a sigil for her, as her magic involved them to a siginificant degree. They didn't really come into play, but they could be considered like foci, etc.

//I agree that Parma should be a core Order of Hermes ability. The line editor has even convinced me that hedgies don't need "general" MR in ArM5, although I didn't lie down softly I'll admit.//

I agree. No general MR for hedgies. I give them very specific resistances. Ursula, for instance, had "strong" resistance to Vim (15) and "weak" resistance to Herbam and Animal (5). This was Art-specific, but it could be generalized to say 15 vs. "magic" and 5 vs. "plants and animals". After all, it protects against non-Hermetic magic as well.

/All hedge magic can be incorporated into Hermetic magic one day, eh?//

Absolutely. I believe this should be a fundamental principle of Hermetic Theory. This is what original research is all about. This doesn't mean, however, that the nature of the hedge magic is maintained, just the effect. For instance, drawing from the Goetist example provided above, the inferal wizard uses his "arts" of Summon, Bind, and Banish to summon and control demons. Within his tradition, this involves various rituals, contracts, negotiations, what-have-you. Hermetically, the same results can be obtained through the use of Rego- and Perdo-Vim spells without the same degree for formality.

Now, an example situation I had with character design about two years ago when my group was starting its first saga...

One of the players was an old hand at Mage: The Ascension (I've never experienced the joys of playing it, myself). He decided he wanted to play a Verbena. My understanding is this is some kind of Wiccan-like tradition in WoD. Now, this most obviously fits into House Ex Miscellanea, but the player was completely opposed to the idea that his magus would use forumulaic spells, or have to study from tomes, or have do any of the other aspects of "classical" magic. He wanted to be completely spontaneous-based (like Mage is), utilize sacrificial and blood magic, etc. Even allowing for Diedne-like virtues and bonuses, the inherent limitations of Hermetic magic would not allow him to express his character as he was envisioning it. I finally had to say "No", the concept was too much a hedge wizard.

Ultimately, he adapted his concept to a Faerie-based magus out of Merinita, but that didn't go too well in play, as his ideas of Faerie were firmly rooted in WoD Changeling, and the Ars Magica variety was too "unusual" for him. Early on, his magus became a Faerie-toasting malcontent, and eventually his character stubbornly refused to go on any "adventure" that remotely smacked of Faerie.

We struggled through that saga and finally dealt it a death blow.

Edited 3/25/2005 4:17 pm ET by Nzld

//I can't speak for others.//

Yes, but their silence damns them... :P

//I think that some people's concept of hedge magic is that hedge wizards are technically just Ex Miscellanea magi that haven't joined House Ex Miscellanea, yet, and thus model them on the same mechanics as Hermetic magi. I don't agree with that. In my opinion, the Ex Miscellnea rules provided in the rules are for those, as I mentioned previously, that have been "Hermeticized", perhaps by working with House Bonisagus, etc. True hedge wizards may indeed be members of House Ex Miscellanea, but they are not modeled simply by giving them Art scores and Hermetic Virtues & Flaws that "illustrate" their tradition.//

I prefer your wider view of hedgies.

//Now, contrary to my statement about different mechanics, I do believe that if you are going to devise a mechanic for hedge wizards, it should follow the methods already shown in Ars Magic supplements, such as Shamans, The Maleficium, etc. This typically seems to involve creating about 3 to 5 "techniques" that govern what the hedge wizard can do. In Shamans, for example, the shamanic individuals had Control, Alter, and Travel (there may have been a fourth one, I can't remember exactly; Summon, perhaps). Goetists in The Maleficium derived scores for things like Summon, Bind, Banish, etc. (once again, I apologize for any inaccuracies here... it's the point that is important).//

Shamans: Control, Alter, Travel and... Ritual.

Goetists (incorrect term, but heh who really notices anyway) can't remember. I find it too hard to look at the Maleficium - the art and text hurts my eyes and it's all too White Wolf for me in tone.

I prefer Mark Shirley's "Nigromancer" diabolists from the Durenmar website.

//This allows you to utilize them with some consistentcy with the core rule mechanics for dice rolls, botches, etc. This is great if the hedge tradition will play a tremendous role in your saga, or if you plan to allow a PC to investigate and pursue it, etc. I do not feel it is necessary for every hedge wizard you come across.//

This is very true - perhaps there's a difference between "foreground" hedgies (PCs and other notable NPC traditions) and simpler, sketched out "background" hedgies - most people use the latter, because dealing with the former vision is too impractical/conflicting under the current incarnation of ArM.

//Similar to how the 5th Edition rules describe the design of creature powers, I choose the ability I want the hedge wizard to have, but don't try to figure out what Technigue-Form combination that would involve, or what Level of effect it would be. That is irrelevent in the grand scheme of things. I determine what Form(s) can resist the effect, for Parma considerations, but that is all. Rather than useing Might points to "power" their powers, however, I try to base it on concepts similar to Hermetic magic, such as fatigue, charges, etc.//

Interesting and practical. How exactly do you "guesstimate" fatigue etc?

<snipped>

Ursula is an interesting example - certainly a bit more than your average "stock" witch.

//I agree. No general MR for hedgies. I give them very specific resistances. Ursula, for instance, had "strong" resistance to Vim (15) and "weak" resistance to Herbam and Animal (5). This was Art-specific, but it could be generalized to say 15 vs. "magic" and 5 vs. "plants and animals". After all, it protects against non-Hermetic magic as well.//

I suspect this is how MR for hedgies will be handled in ArM5. Some would have some inherent specific MR related to their powers, but most others would carry charms vs specific magical effects on their person.

I'd argue that this leads to hedgie "bling-bling" ie. carrying multiple charms vs specific magical effects to create an "almost general" MR but I can see the rationale for this from a meta-game perspective. It's almost in paradigm in some ways although I'm sure it would get unworkable quickly, particularly if only say three different charms could be used at one time.

//Absolutely. I believe this should be a fundamental principle of Hermetic Theory. This is what original research is all about. This doesn't mean, however, that the nature of the hedge magic is maintained, just the effect. For instance, drawing from the Goetist example provided above, the inferal wizard uses his "arts" of Summon, Bind, and Banish to summon and control demons. Within his tradition, this involves various rituals, contracts, negotiations, what-have-you. Hermetically, the same results can be obtained through the use of Rego- and Perdo-Vim spells without the same degree for formality.//

I'm glad someone else thinks this - after all Diedne, Bjornaer and the Mercurians (even Verditius) were all hedgies at some point, by definition. Hermetic theory is in canon, mainly a Roman tradition with some minor Celtic (Diedne) and perhaps (Germanic) elements mainly owing to the fact that Bonisagus happened to be from a Roman tradition and experimented/lived in the Black Forest. Geopolitical fluke? - I don't know, but I can't see how other traditions (Egyptian, Persian, Arabic, Berber, Judaic, Islamic etc) of magic couldn't be incorporated. After all, the Roman and Celtic components of Hermetic magic presumably share different origins yet form the underpinnings of current Hermetic magic.

Anyone else care to comment?

Regards,

Jarkman

//Interesting and practical. How exactly do you "guesstimate" fatigue etc?//

Just by feel. I think Hermetic Theory captures the three fundamental types of magic: Spontaneous, Formulaic, and Ritual. Since most magi can't spontaneously cast decent level magic without losing fatigue, I apply the same idea to hedgies, taking into consideration how strong of a role spontaneous magic plays in their tradition. For formulaic type magic, a similar guideline is applied. Though for the most part, in my experience, most magi aren't fatiguing themselves all that often from formulaic spellcasting. Since ritual magic is always fatiguing, I assume it will always be fatiguing for hedgies, as well.

With my Ursula witch, she had no spontaneous or formulaic magical abilities. Anything she did had to be done through ritualistic activity, or through the actions of any one of her summoned entities. Her "rituals" however, aren't necessarily elaborate affairs. This was illustrated when she placed a geas on one of the PC magi. In game, she simply took about 15 minutes to concoct a special potion which the magus then had to willingly drink. If I ever fully develop her concept, I might consider that the primary geas element used in the ritual may be prepared well in advance through a more elaborate ritual.

//I suspect this is how MR for hedgies will be handled in ArM5. Some would have some inherent specific MR related to their powers, but most others would carry charms vs specific magical effects on their person.

I'd argue that this leads to hedgie "bling-bling" ie. carrying multiple charms vs specific magical effects to create an "almost general" MR but I can see the rationale for this from a meta-game perspective. It's almost in paradigm in some ways although I'm sure it would get unworkable quickly, particularly if only say three different charms could be used at one time.//

Yes, I didn't like to see the loss of charms and protections (i.e. ReVi effects) in 5th Edition, so I hope they are brought back in some form of another. I am considering a House Rule whereas ReVi or similar magic can still create such charms, but at a reduced level. So instead of a ReVi 25 effect giving a Magic Resistance of 25, it might only give a MR of 5.

I don't particularly support artificial limits on the quantity of items that one can wear. That's so AD&D. :-) But there is possibly some mechanic or another that could be developed and "make sense".

My methodology is based on the Parma Magica being a distinct and specific thing. It is the Parma Magica that gives Hermetic magi their edge over others, but Hermetic magi still have magic resistance by virtue of their Arts. To me, this is an innate MR gained through the knowledge and practice of magic, and thus, all users of magic would have MR to some degree based along these lines. Thus, it is quite legitimate to see hedgies with specific MRs as high as 20, 30, or even 40, on the extreme "master of their tradition" end.

Thanks for your thoughts and your experience with your example hedge-witch, Ursula.

It seems, my thinking runs along similar lines although i don't have time to comment at greater length - I'll get back to this when I have a chance. Ta.

Cheers,

Jarkman

I like Hedgies just fine. They are a easy source of arcane supplies for my mage. Anyone not protected by the Oath, and lacking Parma should just step right up and say "wack me on the head with yon hammer please."

Really, it is difficult to reconcile a prevelance of non-hermetics with spell penetration being devastated in 5th Ed. Parma wins.

Of course the more I think about it, you know most Hedgies don't have enough meat on them. They really don't make a good roast. Most are fit for flavoring soup, kind of like a half staved deer. Sombody go feed those Hedgies and fatten em up.

I like mine with a nice red Vis sauce. Garnished with Herbam, and served with a stout ale.