//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
|