Ars magica hands down best magical system ever made to portray wizards

Eh. Debatable.

there in lies the problem everything is debatable, there is barely a baseline anywhere

This is the only thing I'm disagreeing with you about. I kind of despise the Lawbreaker power. Being forced to change one of your Aspects is an awesome way to represent having broken a Law: it changes a fundamental part of your character, you're pushed further down the dark path you started on (compels), you get hounded by wardens (compels), and you can be better at breaking that specific Law (Invokes, occasionally utilizing Taran's Sponsor Debt method). If a player in my game were to deliberately break a Law, I would make them change an Aspect, but I definitely wouldn't force them to take the Power itself, because losing a single refresh on a wizard is devastating and usually makes the character an NPC. The gamebook posits that you "loan" him the Refresh, forcing the character to take the power for real at the next Major Milestone, but that's stopgap at best. Like I said before- I think the Power represents a character like Grevane, someone who has embraced their breaking of that Law and does so again and again, eagerly and willingly.

There's also the issue of accidental Lawbreaking and being forced to then take the power by jerk GM's. I was in a game where a wizard's apprentice used a Weapon:6, fire-element "pain-ray" (based on this) spell to take down a couple of pure mortal gunmen. Except the GM compelled the Scene aspect AFLAME or something like that to force us to get the hell out of dodge, leaving the gunmen. Afterwards, he asked her what Power she was going to replace with First Lawbreaker, saying that she had used an immense Weapon rating on pure mortals, crippling them, and subsequently left them to die. She was furious, and the game fell apart afterwards because we couldn't agree on how we should handle what happened.


I hope you understand that in this theoretical game, not playing a wizard would be moronic. Wizards are already far and away the most powerful character types by virtue of Thaumaturgy/Crafting alone. Removing the already easily-circumvented restrictions upon them will make them even more hilariously broken. If the First Law is gone, good luck with literally any mortal holding up for more than one exchange in combat with a wizard. Third and Fourth Laws gone means that any mystery immediately becomes a joke. Fifth Law means mega-minions, and even more devaluation of the murder mystery. I can't even imagine what a wizard with no Law restrictions would do to game balance.

I am game

for me wizards are supposed to be laws unto themelves, held in check by their own morality, or more powerful wizards and only if said wizard discovers what the wizard is doing. Being able to pull the answer out of a mortal mind is just as much investigation as looking for clues, you still have to find the right mortal and if another wizard or never never critter is involved getting by his spells will prove adventure enough. I want them to feel empowered, not constricted. Plus they wont know right away that the laws aren't really real, they will believe what all young wizards believe. Plus its still against the law to violate them they just have to do it without getting caugt or if caught be strong enough that the senior council doesnt want to waste resources (read wardens) enforcing the law.

Ever play a game called ars magica. excellent  game all about wizards no laws per se. very fun id love a way to make it a modern game any who thats my take i was just hoping others had something apparently not.

Found the quote!

so at least it fits. nicely done.

but it begs a follow up question. If mab can just decide when to create situations to end an immortal especially one under her "control" why would she need to wait for halloween? Why did she need harry to do it? espcially since it wasn't harry that did it anyway, just one of harrys weapons.(murph). This is what I mean when i wrote in another thread that a writers work is mostly contrivance, its just how well he hides it that makes his writing good or bad. the summer lady was killed by harry because JB said she was killed by Harry. Many books later we get a reason that fits the current story that justifies all the trouble JB put Harry threw to make a story called "cold Days" and doesnt invaladate all the crap JB put Harry threw in Summer Knight.

No, Harry specifically stabbed Aurora before she could reach the stone table and held her pinned to prevent her from reaching it while she died. IF she had died on it, there would be some Ice Age - sized problems to solve.


It's just that Harry is a) a Starborn, b) used Cold Iron and c) many of his cases happen around Halloween anyway.

too many assumptions starborn is in reference to outsiders so i doubt that was how he managed it, we don't know if it was halloween JB would have mentioned it but didnt, he probably hadent even thought of the concept at the time of winter knight. so we have a problem. a mortal wizard..and a not so good one. killed an immortal.I think we give JB too much credit.

The whole issue with this though is that immortal people are basically mantles. Even with the power to kill them, you don't really kill them; the mantle immediately goes to someone else and a couple years down the line it's "Meet the new Maeve. Same as the old Maeve." In fact, if you thoroughly kill an immortal non-permanently it might take them longer to return than if you really murder the mantle's "host". And if you imprison them, you take them out much longer than in either case - potentially permanently.

That's the whole point of the existence of Demonreach; trapping immortals.

I think i have spoilers i here and I dont know how to do that thing so dont read if you dont want to know stuff

This whole mantle thing has really bent the dresden world. We have the new knight of the cross saying its just the person but he doesnt feel pain. We have mantles dropping left and right in the last two books. I mean really is mab a diety or is she just some gal who became mab. Maybe we got this whole mantle thing messed up or JB messed up with bringing it in. It has to be more then just "in your head" the jewish knight is wrong. one slate was  drug addict with not an ounce of juice. His mantle gave him magic strength speed and endurance. With that one example we know hes wrong. so its nore. I dont think you can just take the mantle once a person has it or once mab realized slate betrayed her she could have yanked it back, it didn't happen and the story continued. you might say she was distracted but at the end she let slate keep the mantle until Harry was ready to take it up. I think "mantle" is just a term JB is using to discuss the kind of power his characters possess. Its not something that can be slipped off and on, or is easily tradeable. Which begs the question why is Aurora even dead. Last time I checked it wasnt halloween when they duked it out. The only time immortals can die is halloween. So why is she dead.

I dunno about that. If a fire spell was real fire, it'd mess you up almost as badly as the person you use it on.

You might want to look at the Immunity Power on the wiki.

i did its not bad.

Magic circles are weird, and the level of block immunity that comes with stress immunity is up to the GM. Pretty much everyone would let Lord Raith walk through a wall of magical fire, I think, but a wall of conjured stone might be another story.

As for the original question, don't think about it too hard. When you get right down to it, throwing fireballs doesn't actually make sense. Being immune to fireballs if and only if they were created magically doesn't make much sense either, but it doesn't have to.

this
I've always thought it weird to have "magic resistence" (unless one of my toons had it). Once fire is conjured its conjured its there it real and it burns regardless of the source. magic is like reality alteration. just because reality hs been altered doesnt make it anyless real. The room use to be filled with air now its fire. That is the new reality...deal with it. how do you become immune to a 5 ton s of conjured stone when it drops on you. if you were in the never never maybe magic resistence works cause it breaks the spell that holds the never never earth together. But in the real world conjured stone isn't necessarily from the never never. It has a more "real" quality, its effect linger after the spell is cast. I dont know really just tossing stuff out.

Physical immunity is too much for -8 since it makes you immune to everything. Maybe if each thing is costed out seperatly or if you have immunity to physical mean just kinetic force. Bullets, cars pure physical spells. But fire electricity and cold et are different and need to be spelled out as well. Immunity to magic would also have to be spelled out. Immune to illusions for -2, immunity to mental control -2, ect. immunity to harm would cover everything but i have no idea what that would cost.