It has been said that civilised man seeks out good and
intelligent company, so that through learned discourse he may
rise above the common savage and closer to God. With this in
mind, it seem seems strange that, nowadays, Mage players would
rather spend their time arguing relentlessly about who is the
best! I am no exception, and so here is my view. Here is my
Mage
the Ascension: Revised review.
Mage has always been regarded as a special game. It was seen
as a special game when it was first released in 1993, when its
preview in White Wolf magazine had Ray
Winniger claim "it is an achievement like this that
might one day break our industry out of the ghetto we've built
for ourselves". It was still a special game when Dragon
magazine declared it as "arguably the best fantasy
roleplaying game of the decade." It was still a
special game when Mage: Second edition was
reviewed, in 1996 by Arcane magazine who described it as a
"pretentious, dark and often difficult game" and also
"the background and concepts are vast in scope and they can
be bewildering for the player who is new to the game." It
also said "What you get is background, background and
background... Oh and then a few rules are squeezed in at the
back". All these quotes are genuine by the way, but let us
put the last few into context. Arcane magazine awarded Mage:
the Ascension Second Edition an 8/10 mark or, on a
nominal scale, "Very good, with few problems.
Recommended." But considering that other games such as Feng
Shui, Conspiracy X, and Deadlands
had all received 9/10 ratings from this magazine, along with an
"Arcane Seal of Approval", this did seem to be
something of a climb down in its ratings. I will address what I
think the reasons for this were, in a moment, but it is clear
that Mage: Second edition could have been
improved upon.
So what made it a special game? Well, the answer lies both in
its background and in its magic system, both of which are linked.
The magic system has its roots in Ars Magica,
but also in the freeform Amber game, both of
which are seen as "classics" in their own right. It is
significant because it develops a philosophy for the system so
that it doesn't just feel magical, if you're not careful, it
almost seems believable. The system itself, describes nine
"spheres" of magical study, which are used to cast
magic. These are Correspondence, Entropy, Forces, Life, Matter,
Mind, Prime, Spirit and Time. A mage's knowledge in each sphere
is ranked, as with other abilities from 1 to 5. As a mage
increases his or her knowledge in each sphere, reality can be
manipulated to a greater and greater degree. For example, at
Correspondence rank 1 a mage could perceive immediate spatial
perceptions, whereby the mage can develop precise and intuitive
judgements of distance or area. By rank 3, the mage would be able
to tear the very fabric of space itself, allowing the mage to
perceive space a long way away, or even to create portals to get
there. By rank 5 a mage could not only create links between
space, but could change the very nature of space itself. The mage
could stretch distances, alter volumes and mess around with the
very concepts of angles and arcs. The spheres could also be used
in combinations with each other, which in theory meant that with
enough knowledge and imagination, literally any effect could be
achieved. All of this, however, was kept in check by a force
called Paradox, which provides the link between this system and
the background. It must be noted, in Mage Revised, that the magic
system is better organised (for a start, is all put into one
chapter, so you don't need to keep flicking about) and that the
descriptions of the Spheres and their effects are greatly
expanded upon. It would have been nice to get a few more
examples, particularly with the rotes, although you would have
found no more in the Second edition, either. Some of the language
has changed, in the revised edition, too. On the whole it is less
jargonised, and has a few less of the Unnecessary Capital Letters
that were previously a White Wolf trademark.
Many people will note other "bits and bobs" changes in
the rules, but frankly, I don't care too much for rules anyway
(it's the concepts that are important). In truth, when
it comes down to it I will use the rules I need in my game, and
ignore the rest.
The background of Mage revolves around the idea of a
subjective reality. It is a concept borrowed from Jung, who
described a "universal unconsciousness", incorporating
the dreams and perceptions of all people into a whole. This
consensus is represented in Mage by the "Sleepers" who
maintain the form and continuity of their reality as a whole,
simply by the power of their beliefs. The Mage game plays upon
this notion by describing mages as beings who have
"awakened" to realise that reality is not fixed, and it
can be manipulated through a strong will in their own beliefs. As
the mages become more and more enlightened they come to realise
that they can, themselves, transcend the limits of their own
beliefs and actually forge reality in anyway they wish. However,
because the consensus of belief amongst the vast majority of
sleepers is that reality is fixed, "reality" reacts
against the manipulation of itself. This force, that stops
reality being twisted out of shape, is called
"Paradox." Within the Mage game there are two types of
effect: "Concidental" magic which is subtle enough to
not challenge the consensus view, and "Vulgar" magic
which evokes large amounts of paradox. If a mage accumulates too
much paradox, he may well explode or take any other punishment a
Storyteller may wish to hand out.
The background also develops a cosmology, based on the World
of Darkness as presented in Vampire: the
Masquerade and Werewolf: the Apocalypse,
but also extrapolated from the concepts presented within the
magic system. This cosmology is very complex in that it attempts
to incorporate all the (pseudo) philosophies presented in this
game and wrap them up together. It is a key difference in the
approach of Mage: Revised as compared to Mage
2nd, in that it attempts to start from the
"bottom-up", focusing more on the World of
Darkness, as opposed to the attempt to focus from the
"top-down", as before. This approach is certainly
easier to manage and to present to new players. It is also a
clever way to avoid a lot of the difficult issues in the
viability of the reality it presents, whilst linking it better to
its sister games. However, the spirit world is introduced in this
book, in a more concise way, as part of the World of
Darkness chapter, which leaves plenty of opportunity to
expand in future publications. This I hope will happen soon
because, personally speaking, the spirit world is the best part
of Mage's background.
The mages themselves are grouped into nine
"traditions" plus one other group in this book. Other
sourcebooks describe more groups. Each group has a background,
details of its organisation, the factions within it, the
philosophy of the group, the failings of its philosophy, its
theories and practices of magic along with a speciality sphere,
common foci (tools) and character concepts. Again, it has to be
said the level of detail is substantially greater than in
previous editions, which means there is a lot more material for
players to develop interesting characters. It also means that you
will not need to purchase the obligatory "splatbooks"
that you normally need to get to flesh out these groupings.
Character generation is basically unchanged from the Second
edition, its highlight being the use of a three-dimensional
personality construct. This is where players select archetypal
personalities for their nature, essence, and demeanour, meaning
that it is relatively easy to create interesting, well rounded
characters in a reasonably short period of time. There has also
been a new type of trait added: Resonance. Resonance is an
attempt to promote flavour into the magic system, and possibly
part of the general drive in this book to roleplay your
characters better. Unfortunately, I think it could have been done
better. At present, there are three types of Resonance (Dynamic,
Entropic, and Static) with each given the usual 5-dot rating. At
character generation, you are required to choose 1 dot, from one
of these and add an adjective to act as a descriptor. As of yet,
there are no rules of any substance to add to this. Personally, I
like the idea, but would have preferred an approach similar to
that of Passions in Wraith: the Oblivion; with
longer descriptors and less focus on the mechanic. Otherwise,
character generation is a well balanced, well explained and
thoughtful process, though again it could have been done with
more examples.
The rules of the game are too, largely unchanged, aside from a
bit of tweaking here and there. The combat system is adapted from
that presented in Vampire, which in turn adapted
ideas from Trinity. The result is that you have
for the first time a combat system that works without devolving
into an extensive series of dice rolling without any consequence.
The key here is that it reduces the number of dice rolled at the
initiative stage to one die, and that the number of successes
gained at the attack roll forms the base of the damage roll.
There is also a distinction made between bashing, lethal, and
aggravated damage. I would have liked to borrow a few more ideas
from Trinity, like replacing the soak roll with
a threshold value. However, as a whole the World of
Darkness system has a more flexible basic mechanic than
that of Trinity, with more options towards
dice-less play, for example. There are other rule changes too.
The magic system has made the Paradox rules for vulgar magic much
stricter. You can still do it, but if you can no longer seek to
rely on it, without heavy consequences. Similarly, there is a
much greater drive in the rules for the characters to roleplay
there magic more carefully and consistently. I will leave you to
judge whether that is a good or bad thing, but for me good
roleplaying makes a roleplaying game more fun, for all involved.
And that is what gaming is all about.
Perhaps the most contentious issue, between editions, is that
of the "Metaplot" and its repercussions in the
background and the rules. For a start, yet again, it must be said
that the way in which the background history is presented is
better organised. It is more concisely written and in its own
chapter. The story goes that for centuries an "Ascension
War" has raged between two major factions, plus a few others
but to a lesser degree. The major factions were the Traditions as
presented in the core rulebook, and the "Technocracy".
The Traditions, as the name implies, represented the mystical
traditions that could be found around the world. It describes two
"Mythic Ages" where their magical views held sway. The
"Ascension War", supposedly started with the rise of
the Philosopher-Scientists in the Order of Reason which was later
to be called the "Technocracy". These represented the
rational scientific concept of reality which we, generally, view
the world with today. Again, unsurprisingly, it was noted that
the Technocracy was winning the war, here and now, hands down.
The "Ascension War" was one of the central concepts in
the background before Mage Revised moved to end it. Now read this
quote from Mage Second Edition:
"The winners of this war will do more than merely rewrite
history-they will draft the future. It shall be their right to
decide how (or even if) Man and the universe Ascends"(sic)
In other words, this is philosophy through pugilism, or in
truth no philosophy at all. Regardless of the
points made within this book stating that the war can be
philosophical as well as physical, the fact is that Yoda would
not have approved! I say, in a game that carries such themes as
"tolerance" and "enlightenment", having an
Ascension War as a central concept made this game fundamentally
pretentious. Whatever your views on the "Avatar Winds"
(and they did need something as a replacement, or else mages
would have nothing to do except contemplate their navels), it is
better than the Ascension war. Much has also been also of the
lack of material for the Technocracy. Well again, there is a
concise summary within the World of Darkness chapter.
There is no mention of them in the Antagonist chapter which
details Storyteller enemies and statistics, which could be seen
as a fault, but again, there wasn't any antagonist chapter in the
Second edition, just a few statistics thrown in an appendix in
the back.
The Mage Revised edition game also differs from its
predecessors in one very important respect: It is, within the
context of the gaming industry, very interesting indeed. When I
asked my mother, bastion of all wisdom, to give her thoughts on
the difference between the two books her immediate response after
checking out the two books, was to question whether the new
edition was written "by a woman?" Having checked the
creditors at the front of the book it does seem to have collected
a few more female writers than before. Now for sure, I am only
certain of the targeted market of one Games company: Games
Workshop explicitly state that their products are aimed
at "11-16 year old boys". However, it is a fact that
the vast majority of games within this industry are of the
"Fantasy/Sci-Fi/Horror" genre. I am aware in gamer's
polls, it is suggested that something like 80% of gamers prefer
the "Fantasy" genre. If that's what they want, then
give them what they want cries the marketeer! This is pandering
to the lowest common denominator and I must say, it is an
attitude I detest. What about other people outside of
this group; there are other books on the bookshelf! On
television, soap operas and social dramas have continued for
decades to be extremely popular, so why shouldn't these genres be
attempted in a roleplaying game. Much is made of the connection
of Mage to The Matrix and its success thereof.
But what about the success of American Beauty at
the Oscars. Because of the greater personal focus of Mage
Revised, the move away from a jargonised background, and
the requisite of a more subtle magic from the protagonists, this
type of story becomes possible, whereas it wasn't really before.
In short this means, the game now has more options than before,
with a wider potential audience. The World of Darkness was once accused of being adolescent in it's world view. Perhaps, these are signs of growing up.
The index could have been a lot better, and the writers still
have a tendency to refer to things before they have defined them.
I have dropped a point in their rating because of that.
Otherwise, I give it 5 for style and 4 for substance. That's 9
out of 10. Here's hoping that in another 5 years I might see a
new Mage core rulebook getting 10/10 in a review
Style: 5 (Excellent!)
Substance: 4 (Meaty)
Go to forum!
(Due to spamming, old forum discussions are no linked.)