[GMT+1][Voice] New Group seek Beta atoryguides for Ars Magica Troupe Style

Salve Sodales, I am trying to get together a new Ars Magica (5ed) saga troupe style, running evenings in Europe, i.e. GMT to GMT+2.  The call is now open for co-storyguides (alpha, beta, gamma SGs).  A co-SG does not necessarily have to SG a lot.  A player wanting to run one story (1-2 sessions) every three months or so is very valuable. We start with an empty slate, and I have very few constraints myself.  Let us use this thread to agree on the style of game that we want, and then the game time.  I'll try to present my own starting point and ideas below, so if you are interested, please add yours. Keep in mind that I am not going to be the judge of applications.  If we end up with enough people who agree on what kind of game to play on which day, then we start, (or you if I am not part of the agreeing group :-).  Your starting ideas are as good as mine.  About myself. I started roleplaying in the mid-nineties, and we played a couple of sagas of Ars Magica until 1999.  Other games I have GMed are Call of Cthulhu, Expert Drakar och Demoner (bet nobody even heard about that one), Twilight 2000, and Tales of the Floating Vagabond, plus one attempt on Over the Edge, but that was no success at all.  (I cannot remember all the games I have played only as player.) Since then, I have played very little, but for the last eight months, we have been playing Ars Magica on Discord/Roll20.  We have had some great fun, but we eventually found that the players did not want to continue in the same direction. About my style. What I like about Ars Magica is that it is multi-faceted and ambiguous.  It supports different genres of stories, and I like being able to run one session of puzzle solving, another one of social roleplaying, and even the occasional session of combat tactics.  I also like the ambiguity of the World, where Good and Evil are not well-defined, and the magi need to find a subtle balance in their relationship wit the nobility, the faeries, the church etc.  I like the fact that the PCs may reasonable disagree about what is right and wrong in character, and not the least, the long-term play, where player actions have consequences later on. That said, I have no problem avoiding particular themes if some player finds them offensive.  My constraints I have a family and can only play evenings. . Assuming I am alpha SG, I only want to play in a tribunal with a 5ed source book. Voice game.  Weekly or biweekly.  I prefer weekly. As alpha-SG I can run up to half the sessions; in a biweekly I might be able to do a little more, but I need others to run in between to fuel my own inspiration.  One proposal. This is just a proposal, an idea I have been fiddling with.  I shall be happy to play and run in any tribunal, as long as I can get a 5ed sourcebook. I like border regions, and I am most familiar with Northern Europe.  The Order of Odin fascinates me, and I would like to use it for one strand of the saga.  A covenant in Hibernia (facing Iceland) or on the North Coast of the Rhine would be suitable.  I'd like to start with a Summer or Autumn covenant, where the PCs are underdogs, largely because I do not want to have to deal with all the challenges of founding and surviving as a Spring covenant at the beginning.  A stable framework make it easier to make good pointed, themed stories. This leads me to the idea of starting as visiting magi (not members) in a covenant on the North Coast of the Rhine.  This means that if players come and go at an early stage, the covenant is not disrupted.  Five (game) years down the line, the magi could found a new covenant or a chapter house under a covenant they join.  We could even make the start year 1210, and found the canon covenant on Jutland in 1215.  Or they could just join whatever covenant we want to design. Other musings. Below are couple more matters to address, at least by those who have strong preferences.  I only have weak preferences, so I give them mainly as a starting suggestion. 1.  Pace-wise, I would suggest that we aim for one story of 1-2 sessions per season as a rule of thumb.  I think it is important to have sufficiently fast pace to get significant character advancement. 2.  Power level, I prefer medium.  Getting resources should not be trivial, but the shortages should not be constant.  This goes for vis, books, correspondents, etc. 3. I like to assume that most covenfolk (pool characters and NPCs) do not spend every waking hour working for the covenant and developing their primary skill.  Normal people have a life, and they spend the evenings sharing stories of lore and legend or learn to play the flute.  Even if your scribe could reach a score of 6 at the age of 25, he probably will not bother.  (If it is a primary PC, it is a different matter.) 4.  I prefer to start with newly gauntletted magi. 5.  I prefer to keep rules simple and minimise house rules.  If we need to deviate or decide on interpretation, fine, but we need to write it down when we do.

A lot of these considerations work for me, especially a location in the Baltic Sea. Pomerania could be of interest, or Gotland. The latter is more mercantile in orientation, but it has a surprisingly rich history, if you're into folk traditions; it's also a good bridge to Novgorod. The former has a lot of political aspects, such as the Northern Crusades, the issues the Bjornaer are facing, the Danish royal progression and a few others. A few things where my personal preferences might differ: 1. I prefer a lower power-level. Specifically, I want a hard cap on the maximum starting spells (25 would work), on lab totals and on aura strength. I do *not* want a player-generated covenant - that's a deal-breaker for me.  2. No great fan of the Order of Odin. They are a useful bogeyman for mages in continental Europe, but there's nothing worthwhile, in my opinion, in print to make them actually interesting to interact with. As a result, I prefer to avoid having them actually appear, and their magic should be out of bounds to character mages. Which leads to point... 3. *No* non-Hermetic traditions, and *no* non-human characters. The strength of the setting is about humans and human morality struggling with their surroundings. 4. I'd like to work with a limited list of books For instance, I'd be happy with just the core book, the tribunal books, the three HoH books, A&A, LoM and C&G. No fan at all of Ancient Magic, the RoP books, and several others, if you take the books as a whole. [Obviously, all books may have individual good entries, but it's futile to discuss each item from every printed product.] 5. We'll need to discuss the actual nature of pagan gods. The "faerie" approach that is the official line in Ars Magica poses problems, and since the areas both of us seem to find interesting have strong remnants of various pagan traditions, it's likely important that we're in agreement on whatever we decide.

I don't have any problems with your take on these issues, but it would be useful with some clarification. 1.  Without player-generated covenants, what role does the covenant have in the game?  Do you still let the covenant be a character managed and developed by the PCs and players, after it has been generated by the SG?  Or do you make the covenant a more abstract part of the PCs surroundings? 3. Do you want to exclude non-human characters and non-hermetic magic completely?  Or only from the player characters?  In other words, do hedge wizards and faeries remain part of the characters' surrounding?   2. You may be right that there is nothing useful in print about OoO.  I am with 4ed canon on this, nobody knows what OoO is.  Maybe it is one strong consolidated enemy, maybe it is just a fidget of Hermetic imagination.  I am not up to date with 5ed on this, so I have assumed that canon leaves it open and it has to be shaped within the game. To be honest, I used OoO just as a label for the hedge wizards and pagan traditions to be encountered in Jutland, Norway, and Iceland. The ideas I have for it can easily be ported to Baltic traditions. Thus I think the question is what you think of pagan and hedge encounters in general, cf. 3. 

I'm either in agreement with much of what George said or it's an issue I don't have a strong opinion about. My numbering does not match either of your numbering, apologies. Game Stuff -  1. Rhine is fine, as a player I feel I've explored it a fair amount so find Hibernia, which I know very little about, to sound more interesting as a setting. Of Northern Tribunals with a 5th ed book I would ask "No Normandy, please." 2. Fine with being visitor or new recruits to a summer or autumn covenant. 3. Don't feel strongly one way or the other regarding Order of Odin, that said I'm toying with the idea of playing a roguish Flambeau who probably believes the boogeyman myths about it (Mostly to play somewhat against the type I usually play). 4. I'm fine with not allowing hedge wizard or Holy/Faerie/Infernal Traditions for PCs (outside of case-by-case Ex Misc traditions if folks are ok with those traditions, The Witches of Thessaly are pretty Canon) but I think those most definitely should be in the world. One of the great things, to me, about Ars is that because of Troupe play almost everything is written to allow players to use it 5. Books allowed - So far this is my largest contention with anything said above, I strongly believe every book should be taken on a "what individual parts do we want or not want" level but I also feel all the RoP books are pretty central to the world, even if we nix certain individual things completely or for players. I'm fine with no PC characters with any form of might (until we get familiars and then I'd love for someone to play my familiar). A book not mentioned that also seems very central to me is Mysteries, I'm fine with removing certain lines of mysteries (dream magic), many of the higher-order mysteries (by this I'm mostly talking about the "become a magical being" stuff) but the idea that Hermetic Wizards haven't traveled to Iberia or the Levant and learned from the advanced alchemical and astrological "sciences" and tried to incorporate them in their works seems to me to go against certain threads of history at the time and the feel, in my mind, of the magic of Ars Magica. Hermetic Theurgy and spirit magic, similarly, seems very central to many magical traditions at the time and may have survived in lineages or cults in the order. Though I would see no problem with nerfing certain aspects of it such as not allowing the theurgic spell that can replace a whole technique-form combo. But, as always, "can players start with these things?" is more the question. One option with this would be books that are completely allowed, books that are mostly allowed, and books that require approval for the things in them. I would be fine with saying stuff from the books Pat mentioned is in the completely allowed list 6. Player generated covenants - I'm fine with an SG taking the lionsshare of designing a covenant but I think it's important players get some of what they want so when I have done this I give each player a sort of "wish list" of things I will include at some level. Player wishes should be couched more as "a good Vim summa" rather than "A L16 Q15 Vim Summa." 7. I'm not a fan of hard caps on the "end result" of chargen. Limits at the "front end" such as "No art may be above 10," that's fine, but having to redo my character because I've got a LT that is 26+ in some particular circumstance or where my focus is involved seems absurd. A spell level limit of 25 is fine by me, I don't see myself having any 30+ LTs unless I choose a focus. 8. Power level - I prefer medium power level as well. I feel like what Pat means is not so much power level as fantasy level but that's just my reading of what was written, not necessarily what they meant. 9. Pagan gods - Doesn't seem all that important to me but then I usually go with the "All of the above (except divine)" route, as in: Yes, there are Faeries who are these gods, yes there are daimons who are these gods, and yes there are demons who pretend to be these gods.I'm not really into the idea that things aligned to a particular realm so strongly they have might can switch to another realm so it's usually just copies in my mind. 10. I think Ars is a game where house rules (or merely house rulings where things may be vague) are absolutely necessary and they should be decided on before they come up when possible but written in an easily found place when they are made. 11. Pacing - I'm fine with "season a session" as a general rule we shoot for with the individual stories lasting 1-3 sessions. I'm also prefer in game gaps of seasons between seasons. It's one of the reasons I'm definitely on board for a non-spring/non-2nd-spring covenant, setting up covenants gets so bogged down in doing a story every season. Scheduling sorts of Questions - 1. I would feel comfortable offering to run a story once in a while in the 1-3 sessions range. So you could count me in as a possible Gamma SG. 2. I'm on the West Coast of the US but my mornings are often clear so European evenings often work well for me. This is not the case on Thursdays so I could not play that day. 3. I'm fine with weekly or every other week. In the beginning I think the important part is we try to stick to one or the other but once the game has some steam I feel one of the serious strengths of troupe play is that a player missing a session or two isn't a big deal. So could see the group doing every other week just to make sure everyone can join every session at the start then moving towards more frequency. Thanks for reading my tractatus.

By the Way, I'm nullsettings on Discord and dc444/nullsettings on the Atlas Forums.

The core of what I was aiming at in my suggestions, above, is to take away as many means as possible for the players to stack bonuses. I have played a fair bit of Ars Magica over the years, and the campaigns I enjoyed were consistently low-powered, with players having to "make do" with the options on hand. Sometimes we have a few choices, but we never could cherry-pick. Once you allow people to design their sanctum freely, for instance, things are well on the way to "charactersheet management hell", rather than actually roleplaying.  Regrettably, this works best when there is a central storyguide, who handles all such affairs, and I understand that is not something you are aiming for. Yet, for it to be worth setting aside time for, I would need to be assured that we will not , in fact, be playing lab rats that aim to control the world from their ivory tower.

Thanks for the clarification, Pat. I like your thinking. I certainly do not like it when players stack up exotic virtues and flaws from books I have never had time to read.  Firstly, it drives the complexity up, making it harder to manage. Secondly, it takes some of the mystery away, giving less room to surprise the players in game.  Character generation based on Core and HoH (using the Mysteries only as referenced in HoH) only suits me fine.  I am simply just not the one to go hard-line on this issue. Some low power features which I would not like are the magi fighting to go to adventures every season  because they have no options which give them as much/as relevant learning (xp).  Or similarly, if the verditius can hardly make an enchantment every leap year because vis is so scarce. On the contrary, it would be even worse if vis and books are so plentiful that nobody wants to adventure unless forced to. I think the SG issue you mention can be managed by house ruling some «reward guidelines», to say how rare and how good each kind of friendly encounter or reward should be. I am quite happy to take the alpha SG role to a level where I talk through and approve features that could push the power level with other SGs, if that's what the troupe wants. I am very happy to play a saga free of lab rats, if we find critical mass around such an idea.  I am also very happy to play a saga with bookkeeping lab rats, if that's where we find the most sustainable group.  New respondents should state their position on this matter, please. When I play a lab rat, I never aim for ivory towers nor world domination. I like to discuss magic theory and blue sky ideas in character. I like the whimsical Verditius who makes bizarre and surprising artifacts and use them in stories. In fact, I hate the make to sell concept of 5ed Verditius.  I like to make lab inventions in order to display them in stories. I am not sure if you, Pat, want to ban such lab rat concepts too? In any case, it is very important to me that the lab rats make themselves interesting in stories. I am happy to play with or without lab rats, but lab rats who are completely boring outside the lab have no use in a story.

To assuage any fear, the flambeau I mentioned is not a lab rat. I was thinking of making her a school of Ramius dog trainer so she would need some significant downtime to train her dogs or else I don't really get to do the "cool thing my character is meant to do." But she is a warrior and will want to go on adventures. I was thinking of taking Withstand Casting, a virtue out of the "Curiously Common Magics" section of The Mysteries and considering things like Performance Magic, Art of Memory, and a few other interesting character options are listed in that chapter I would ask that Mysteries not be dismissed as a whole. At the very least that chapter should be acceptable at character generation IMO. My concept will survive without that chapter being accessible, sure, but a musician-wizard might not.

Ah yes, Mysteries! I'll admit that I temporarily forgot about that book - which is a pity, as it's by and large good flavour, and not too out of whack. Regarding the Flambeau: I have a weakness for non-traditional members of that House, so I am inclined to looking forward to see it evolve. In the Cornwall/Lyonesse campaign I mentioned earlier, I played a Flambeau who was a Rego specialist, with a secondary in actual non-magical pointy sticks. And, now I think of it, political complications. Definitely had an affinity for those, if only because he had a rather risky mundane ancestry - he was the theoretical heir of Arthur of Brittany, and had things gone the right (?) way, he might have had a claim on the thrones of both France and England. Not that he actually knew, mind you... I actually do not mind lab rats per se, as in scholarly types, but people who, out of character, plan to only invest in studying and time spent in their perfect little aura can lead to some boring characters, and thus sagas. A nerdy mage, plagued with reasons to deal with the world outside of their covenant, on the other hand, can be great fun! Do we want any house rules? The main thing that comes to mind is House Tremere. Since their House Virtue is hermetic, they are locked out of a lot of options that are traditionally strong, and more or less have to leverage Certamen, if they are to resist being shoveled under by other members of the Order. And a Certamen specialist can be a very one-sided affair, I'm afraid. More's the pity, as both House and concept are excellent.

I kinda hate Tremere (thanks 3rd e & Vampire) so don’t care on way or the other.

If there is a clear case for a house rule, we make a house rule.  I like to minimise them, both for the sake of simplicity, and because it is hard to gauge all the consequences of a house rule up front, but I am not categorical. In the case of Tremere, I think the only problem is that they are bared from taken a non-certamen magical focus.  Is there something I have overlooked? That is inconvenient, and I do not mind allowing them a second focus.  Or allow them a «puissant certamen» +3 bonus to replace the certamen focus. Certamen has only come up once in all the sagas I have played ...  It seems that we are four people who can co-SG.  Dylan indicated he could run the occasional story, not enough to call himself beta SG.  I have one from my old group who suggest 20-30% of the running load.  He has not posted here, but he is flexible.  I can run up to 50%.  Pat has not said anything about co-SG capacity.  I think it would be good to have one more, to have a little redundancy, but if everything goes well, I think we are enough people to start. I'll give it a few more days to see if we get another poster.  There is one more player from my own group, friendly with a preference for low power, but I doubt he has time to run. Any opinions about what the ideal troupe size is?

Yeah, I agree, Dylan.  You really need to forget everything you knew from WoD, 3ed, etc. before you read HoH:TL  with fresh eyes.  It probably helps making a big bonfire and burn everything WW ever published.

3-6, with a preference towards the middle values is ideal troupe size.

I could easily be a co-story guide, if we can find a schedule to accommodate us all. I have a lot of story seeds from years past to work with, and a fair bit of experience to build upon. My preference is a low number of players, since I dislike playing with a partial group, and the more people you have, the harder it is to organize sessions where we can all make it, even if we have a fixed play time. Comes with having family lives, and all that.

Yeah, but what is a partial group?  PCs with no player present?  Or a stable group with a player and his PCs missing?  I hope to avoid unplayed PCs by running single-sessions stories as much as possible, so that when a player is absent, their characters are simply not part of that story. Under that condition, I prefer playing without a player (and without their PCs), than to miss a few weeks of playing. It is a compromise though. I find that three people (two players + SG) often get a bit tame.  A group of four generates 50% more ideas, and do not as easily get creatively stuck.  But 4-5 is a good number if everybody is completely reliable.  Personally, I can play any weekday or Sunday from 7.30pm GMT.  I hope to finish på 10.30pm GMT, but I can stretch it 1h-1½h past that. Tuesday is my favourite, and I can probaly start 6pm GMT on Tuesdays.  Saturdays might work, but probably not until 8ish pm.  Fridays, probably not on a regular basis.

Understood, George - but that won't work for me, I am afraid. Given that I would need to make time to fit in the game, I am afraid that I get to be picky. The right gaming environment is, to me, more important than the system or setting. With that in mind, I will bow out and wish you the best. Ars Magica is a great setting, a decent system, and pretty hard to find people for.

Please, Pat.  Can we look at this again?  I am stating preferences, not requirements.  If we can form a very stable and dedicated four-person group, I am going to love that. It is just that, in past experience, there are too many players who do not work that way.  Dylan, what's your take on this?   As you say, Pat, ArM is difficult to recruit players for, and for many modes of play work for me, so I am happy to adjust to the one where we can form a stable group.

I’m quite open with regards to time if that was what you meant. Weekends are pretty full for me. I find a strength of troupe play, with the multiple characters is its ability to handle a larger group that partially meets..

I think there are two ways forward. 1.  A group of four, maybe five, with sufficient dedication to meet in full almost every week. 2.  A somewhat larger group taking advantage of troupe style to accept absences. Like Pat, I prefer 1, but unlike Pat I am happy to accept 2 as a compromise because I believe it is more feasible.  I also thought that a somewhat larger group, with more gamma SG, could be necessary so that some co-SG-s can get away with a smaller contribution.  So what I wanted to ask you, Dylan, is if you think Pat's approach is feasible for you. If you do, I think we have the numbers.  Otherwise, you and Pat are incompatible it seems.

I think I’m often a more dedicated player but Ive seen too many groups completely disintegrate because there was an inability to handle one player missing a game. I can do the “if someone is missing we don’t play or we play something else” sort of thing, I just think that something else being a grog adventure is better than it being a one shot of apocalypse world, definitely did a lot of that with my long running group that mostly plays Burning Wheel.

Hi folks Are you still looking for members? And if so, did you work out a Schedule yet? o/

A group is forming, we have settled for Wednesday nights, and we are going to give it a try, probably in Hibernia.  I could definitely use one more with a little bit of co-SG capacity. I'll pm a discord link.