Archive for May 30, 2012


Now we’re getting into some really interesting conceptual territory here as this week’s M:tC preview centers on the flavor of Arisen Magic. Let’s take a look at what Malcolm has to say about it:

Please let this be artwork from the book

Aura and Viscera

As some of you know, I worked on Mage: The Awakening a whole lot. That game clings to the motifs people associate with classic sorcery: earth, wind, fire, all that kind of thing. Plus subtle bodies, auras, and other things that glow in the night. Draw some Celtic knots and fire up the Loreena McKennitt playlist!

I’m intentionally exaggerating this vibe to discuss a common assumption — that magic is an immaterial force with material effects. We assume this because of the legacy of Cartesian dualism, subsequent cultural narratives, and other fancy liberal-arts concepts. It also works for us because it makes magic the realm of the soul: an inherently mysterious (and unnecessary, if you don’t believe in such things) domain where all our knowledge about the material world goes out the window, and our imaginations take charge. But these things are essentially modern assumptions. They stick with us because of our particular history, and in games like Mage, we can use them to great effect.

But Mummy’s conception of magic hails from an older tradition — one alien to our modern sensibilities. This is a path of sorcery that predates Plato and a “world of ideals.” It predates loving, omnipotent gods and the easy division of existence into material and immaterial realms. For example, Egyptologists believe that none of the various terms we translate into “soul” have the characteristics we assume. They are not invisible, untouchable things, but fade in and out of different aspects of the ancients’ lives. When the time is right, they touch and they feast, and just as often take out their rage through calamity, disease, and ill fortune.

So Arisen magic has a visceral, material quality, channeled into bodies and objects, with the latter being of especial importance to them. The Deathless know of invisible forces and abstract, magical power, but these things manifest with less of a New Age, power-up kind of “glow” than you might expect. And although mummies are the heirs of a rich metaphysical tradition, that tradition’s laws demand set, pragmatic manifestations “inscribed” into the soul like a charm painted on a sarcophagus… or carved into the shape of a mystic artifact.

So… yeah, pretty heavy stuff over there. I have to admit that unlike the other previews, I’m having a bit of difficulty comprehending this one. And so I turn towards Wikipedia for a quick look at the the Ancient Egyptian concept of the Soul. I remember a smattering of the older Mummy: the Resurrection using the parts of the soul as the basis for the Character types, or dynasties, but I’ll confess that it’s been a long time since I’ve read the book.

I find it interesting though that Malcolm actually mentioned the soul in reference to magic, perhaps in this incarnation, the magic of the Arisen tap into these Soul aspects? Hard to tell, but still very intriguing.

On a side note, that artwork that came with the article is awesome. Definitely enjoying the Persona / Jojo’s Bizarre Adventure vibe I’m getting from that thing sticking out of her back.


We’re better than this… right? Right?

The D&D Next Playtest Packet has been out for a few days now, and already interesting (and heated) discussions are starting to come out. Today, I’m looking at the vocal population of those who decry the state of the basic Fighter as it is currently presented as “Lame” and otherwise terrible.

I’m not here to tell you that you guys are wrong in wanting to get a Fighter than can do all sorts of Wuxia-inspired wire-fu stunts and crazy attacks that can take down hordes like a scythe cutting wheat. In fact, I think that’s pretty cool.

All I’m hoping for is a little bit of understanding that some people actually enjoy characters that can’t do all that.

I’ll let that sink in a bit first.

I enjoy playing simple, unoptimized characters. I’ll be the first to admit that I don’t have a head for numbers, and that probably has something to do with the fact that my eyes glaze over when I look at complicated laundry lists of powers and spells. Sure, I won’t one-shot an Elite monster, or be able to match the Spellcasters in terms of pure efficiency, you know what? That’s okay because I’m still having fun.

A while back, I wrote an article on Metagame Rewards, or the Different Kinds of Fun, and I find that going back to it now and then helps a lot in accepting that people game for very different reasons, and sometimes we just have to accept that other people have fun in their own ways.

Personally, I find myself enjoying Alea (the thrill of taking risks), Catharsis (the feeling of release after an intense experience) and Fiero (the thrill of overcoming adversity and challenge) when I play Fighters. This is perhaps the reason why I don’t see a problem in relying completely on sheer improvisation to win or survive a fight regardless of whether or not my Spellcaster teammates are having an easier time of it.

In a nutshell, what I’m trying to say is that we could all use a little bit of patience and understanding when looking at how others react to the Playtest rules. We’re at the earliest stages of an open playtest that will last months, and from what I understood of what D&D Next is supposed to be, they’ll be releasing more complexity as rules modules over the coming month as development proceeds.

Somewhere down the line, I can imagine that they’ll be releasing subsystems that beef up the Fighter to operate on a Powers system similar to 4e. With that, you can run it the way you like, and I’m certainly not going to complain about it.