Ars Magica 5th

[Nightchilde-2]

I just picked this up at my FLGS. Wow. While I'm not too fond of most of the art, layout-wise, this is one pretty book, very crisp, clean and well-organized compared to earlier editions.

Man, I wish I could convince my players to play Ars Magica.

 

[VorpalBunny]

I've got mine pre-ordered on Amazon along with The Broken Covenant of Calebais, and I'm looking forward to getting my grubby mitts on 'em both. I never really jelled with 4th edition - a lot of the rules made no sense to me - (like how an unarmored beggar had a better advantage in combat than a knight) but I heard a lot of stuff was cleaned up in 5th.

Definitely looking forward to it.

 

[Emiricol]

5th??!?! Excellent! Can you tell us how it differs from 4th Ed.? (If that's asking a lot, I understand, heh)

 

[Crothian]

Ya, this is one that even though I've never played the game I am really hoping to get. Of course with the present season upon us it is a little tougher to get books for me.

 

[Nightchilde-2]

5th??!?! Excellent! Can you tell us how it differs from 4th Ed.? (If that's asking a lot, I understand, heh)

I might be able to do so better once I actually read it, and if my spotty memory where 4th edition is concerned lets me remember enough to make a comparison.

However, after a quick skim (and I mean very quick), it's much better organized (4th and 3rd always seemed poorly organized to me).

There is no longer a separate phase in combat for magic actions (something I always ignored anyway).

Virtues and Flaws no longer have a point value; instead they have a Free, Minor or Major status. For instance, Grogs can take up to three Minor Virtues, but must take a like number of Minor Flaws.

Uhm. That's really about all I've looked at as of this time. You can blame my job for that..silly job interfering with my RPG-reading times...

 

[Wombat]

Many little changes in the book, some large ones as well.

Question: I am trying to put together a review of AM5 for ENWorld. What would be more helpful to people -- a "you've never played this before" review or a "these are the changes in 5th ed" review? Overall I am trying, of course, for something in between, but would it be better to emphasize one side of the equation over the other?

Want to make the review as widely useful as possible

 

[Crothian]

With the nature of Ars Magica being sort of unknown and with this being a primarily d20 site I'd go from the angle that people have not played it. OBviously people have heard of it, it isn't an unknown game, but not many have really played it.

 

[DMScott]

5th??!?! Excellent! Can you tell us how it differs from 4th Ed.? (If that's asking a lot, I understand, heh)

Atlas Games has a page for the game that includes some design notes and brief overview of what's different.

I haven't played Ars Magica since 1st or 2nd edition (whichever one had the relatively slim softcover rulebook), but I've always liked the different take on group dynamics and what PCs do. I wish more games would push the envelope a bit on those sorts of issues.

 

[Achan hiArusa]

Ars Magica d20

I thought about doing an Ars Magica d20 and replace the Vancian Magic. Wizards would get 8 + Int bonus skill points per level (of course x4 at 1st level). The techniques would all be Int based skills and the forms would be Charisma based skills. Then damage would be around 1d6 per level of damage inflicted. Of course that means getting rid of most of the character classes or changing them greatly (you could make techniques and forms different class skills for different classes, a Ranger could have Animal and Herbam and then have to buy all his Techniques as cross class skills). Eh, its an idea.

 

[Crothian]

Finally picked it up. THe layout is top notch, but the art is a little less then great. I need to read it but the look of the book is great.