Magic Resistance Design/pt
Os detalhes da Resistência a Magia tem funcionamento distinto na Quinta Edição em contraste com edições anteriores de Ars Magica; sob as regras da Quinta Edição é muito mais fácil decidir se um dado efeito estaria ou não sujeito à Resistência Mágica. As regras da Quinta Edição ainda assim tem seus problemas. Esta seção explica a lógica que justifica as regras como existem atualmente, e oferece algumas sugestões de como lidar com suas limitações.
Resistência a Magia no ArM5
Veja a página sobre Resistência a Magia para uma descrição de como exatamente ela funciona na Quinta Edição.
Por que a Resistência a Magia não Desfaz Magia
Alguns dos efeitos da Resistência a Magia são um tanto estranhos. (Esqueça "Fio da Lâmina"; experimente "Fio da Colher", um efeito MuTe que dá às armas -1 de dano, cegando seu fio, e ainda assim as faz ricochetear quando colidem com Parma (Magica). No entanto, todos os princípios que eu pude imaginar tinham efeitos peculiares, e os efeitos peculiares deste pareciam ser dos menos sérios - os de outros abriam buracos enormes na Resistência a Magia. Você sempre pode usar uma Regra da Casa para evitá-los, mas dados os intermináveis debates que a resistência a magia causou [na Quarta Edição], decidi optar por algo simples.
O problema fundamental é que os instintos modelados pelo D&D em jogadores de RPG não fazem sentido. Por que afinal armas mágicas não seriam resistíveis? São efeitos mágicos. Um conjunto de regras que dissesse que 'resistência a magia resiste o que quer que seja que você ache adequado para manter o balanço de jogo" não teria sido muito útil...
--David Chart, na lista Berkeley de Ars Magica List, em 2004-Novembro-26
Resistência a Magia no ArM5 não cria um campo de anti-magia ao redor do Mago, pois foi entendido que se o fizesse resultariam sérios problemas
Por exemplo, se Resistência a Magia desfizesse magia (mesmo que temporariamente) um mago poderia transformar uma rocha em uma pedrita e arremessá-la em um oponente. O efeito mágico seria desfeito quando a pedrita alcançasse o alvo e esta voltaria a ser uma rocha!
Outro exemplo: um mago poderia transmutar veneno em alguma bebida inofensiva, digamos vinho. Ele poderia oferecer uma taça a outro mago. Se a Resistência a Magia pudesse desfazer efeitos mágicos, o vinho reverteria a veneno e mataria o outro mago (a não ser que o efeito mágico conseguisse superar sua Resistência, e nesse caso a bebida permaneceria edível até que o efeito expirasse).
Em resumo, um modelo de Resistência a Magia que desfaz magia é fundamentalmente falho, pois haveria muitas maneiras de voltá-lo contra quem o possui.
The Pink Dot Loophole
On the other hand, since Magic Resistance keeps out all kinds of magical things, a magus can abuse his own magic resistance to get protection from mundane attacks. This has come to be called the Pink Dot Loophole.
Because Magic Resistance keeps out magical things, a magus can defend himself by casting a harmless spell on his opponent's weapon. The enchanted weapon would be repelled by Magic Resistance according to the rules as written. The standard example of such a spell is a Muto Imaginem effect that makes a tiny pink dot appear on the blade.
Any general Magic Resistance system is going to run into problems like this. The question is what problems are players and storyguides willing to accept. In ArM5, the second problem ("parma blocks pink dot") was considered less serious than the first problem ("parma can kill you"). There also seems to have been a strong desire to make a system that is simple and consistent so players can understand it and use it without major problems.
Note: If you read the rules as is, Imaginem wouldn't do this. As the whole object doesn't 'become' magical, the visualization of it would, so your magi would only be protected against the objects 'pinkness', since the sword is not being propelled, moved or created from magic.
No One Likes the Pink Dot Loophole
Not everyone is happy with the implications of the rules as they are written, but then, no one has come up with an alternative system that pleases everybody, either. People are welcome to try to "fix" perceived problems in the Magic Resistance rules for their own sagas.
There is nothing wrong with playing with a vague, fudged version of what Magic Resistance stops in your sagas, if you don't like the effects of the rules as written. Actually, it's positively a good idea; this is your game, play it in a way you like. But you'll find that you do have to fudge, or people will invent the Tree of Dragon Slaying spell: MuHe a mature oak tree into an arrow, and fire it at a dragon. [If magic resistance dispells the magic, t]he mundane tree gets through, and being hit by an oak tree doing over a hundred feet per second would hurt even the toughest dragon...
--David Chart, Berkeley Ars Magica List, 27 Nov. 2004
Neither do I. On balance, though, I like the alternatives less.
Possible Fixes for the Pink Dot Loophole
A number of possible fixes for the Pink Dot Loophole have been proposed. All of these (except the first) would be considered House Rules.
- You could simply ask everyone in the Troupe to agree not to exploit the loophole. Doing so may be intellectually unsatisfying, but it does allow you to get on with the game. Erik Tyrell's suggestion from the official Ars Magica message board.
- Change Parma Magica so it doesn't protect a magus against his own spells. There are two consequences to this. First, the Pink Dot Loophole is made harder to exploit but it is not completely eliminated: two magi working together could still make one another invulnerable to weapons. Second, a magus will not need to lower his Parma to cast beneficial spells on himself, so this could be seen as increasing the power of a magus.
- Rule that Parma Magica only protects against effects that target the magus or include the magus in the target area. Magic swords would then slide right through Parma, but so would a lot of other things. In particular, under this variant, magic resistance would no longer offer any protection against nonmagical water magically transformed into poison. It would open a lot of vulnerabilities in magic resistance, allowing it to be bypassed by clever (read, devious) players.
- Make some kind of "intelligent Parma" rule that magic resistance can distinguish between effects that are potentially harmful and those that aren't. This also makes it easy to cast spells on yourself and it also calls for a lot of rulings by the troupe on what exactly can be resisted and what can't - the very situation the Fifth Edition rules seem designed to prevent.
Hedge Wizards and Magic Resistance
In ArM5, the only general-purpose Magic Resistance available to humans is Parma Magica. That means only Hermetic Magi have magic resistance. Hedge Wizards don't. David Chart explained the reasons for this:
Given that we are talking about game design, a meta-game reason is sufficient. After all, why are fermions subject to the exclusion principle, apart from the meta-game reason that it allows solid bodies to exist?
Ars Magica is a game about Hermetic magi. They are, and should remain, the focus. However, other traditions of magic are fun, and people like them. Thus, I wanted to create some space for them.
One possibility, that seems to have a number of supporters [on the BerkList ], is that Hermetic magic is wonderfully general, but that hedge traditions are more powerful in their specialities. I don't think this option is viable.
Why? Because people only play one magus-type character (in general), and very, very few people want to play pure generalists. If you want to play a particular kind of specialist, which will you pick: the Hermetic, who could , in principle, learn to do things in which you have no interest, or the hedgie, who is better at what you want to do?
Of course, if Hermetic magic is just better in every respect than every other tradition, no-one will really want to play the hedgies, either, so that's not much fun either.
The path I'm taking is this. Hermetic magic is the most powerful form of magic available to humans. It is the most flexible, and while other traditions might match it in raw power, in a limited area, nothing obviously exceeds it. However, there are things that Hermetic magic cannot do; the limits of magic. Some hedge traditions will be able to break one of these limits.
However, to be fair, there should be something that only Hermetic magic can do. That something is general magic resistance. It's probably the most useful unique power, which is right, since Hermetic magic is supposed to be the best. If you like, the 'limits of magic' are those listed in ArM5, plus 'The Limit of Magic Resistance'. Major traditions break one limit each; Hermetic magic breaks the limit of magic resistance.
Now, a specialised tradition will have defences that work against specific magic. It might even have something like Form resistance, against a limited range of magic. But if a Hermetic magus goes outside that range, the other tradition has no defence.
Not having general magic resistance is a major weakness. Giving it to all hedge traditions gives us more flexibility to make their active powers interesting without risking making them more attractive, in raw power terms, than Hermetics.
If magical and faerie creatures can grant general resistance, then traditions that work by summoning and binding, or bargaining, would logically have it. Ruling out traditions that summon and bind creatures does much greater violence to my sense of the fitness of things than disallowing the power to magical and faerie creatures. Hence, in order to allow spirit masters, Titania can't grant general magic resistance.
Pure meta-game considerations. The in-game justification is 'Magic and Faerie don't work like that'. They are, after all, realms of power with no real-world, or even, to be honest, real-myth equivalent.
--David Chart, Berkeley Ars Magica List, 10 Jan. 2005
Veja Também
Note que nem todas as Tradições serão necessariamente Mágicas; existem Tradições Divinas e Infernais que podem em tese ignorar esta limitação. O mesmo também é verdade para o Glamor Faerie.
[[Category:Languages pages{{#translation:}}]]