Customer Reviews

Ars Magica : The Art of Magic (Ars Magica)

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

A quirk of many Ars Magica players is that they have a particular edition they value above all others: mine was third edition: to my mind, it was the apex of the games origionality. At its best, Ars Magica was an intensly colourfull game that gave modern players a filter through wich they could percive a fantastic medival world. It was a mix of judith tarr and prof. umberto eco, and propably the best thing mark rein . hagen ever made.
Unfortunately, the current owners of the game do not get all that. They seem to think that its supposed to be a "realistic" simulation of the middle ages: not that the middle ages are not intresting enough on their own, but that just wasnt the point of Ars Magica. Its name means "the Art of Magic", and it was supposed to focus on what was OUTSIDE the medival world: its cosmology was one never thought of in medival times. The main characters are outcast wizards, not, say, knights.
Also, i have a terrible suspicion that the current owners overuse of historical material is due to a lack of ideas of their own. Even the colours used in the game - books have become more grey.
One last thing: the rules have always been a bit heavy - going (even a simplified version of rolemaster can manage to be quite complex), but the basic dice system is easy and logical enough, so with a bit of practice a storyteller should be able to manage with a few general rolls. The fourth edition people should have kept most of them unchanged, i understand.