nWoD Mage vs. oWoD Mage – FIGHT!


Other RPGs

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Since these threads tend to be popular over here, and to prevent a treadjack on another forum, I figured I would start this worthy topic here.

Which is better Mage: the Ascension or Mage: the Awakening?

Both have points in their favor:

"The Awakening"

  • This version of Mage dispenses with the bloated oWoD over-plot. This also solves some of the conceptual issues with both the Marauders and the Technocracy. (The Nephandi were fine because selling one’s "soul" to evil is an ancient concept in many belief systems around the world.)
  • Stepping back from several real world religions helps to minimize the potential to offend several players – evangelical Christians, Native Americans, Wiccans, etc.
  • Going to a more universal rules system eases integration of different types of Supernaturals, either as PCs or NPC foes.
  • More tightly codifying the Covert vs. Vulgar nature of magic should help reduce arguments in play.
  • Increased reliance on “Rotes” should make the game more accessible to new players. Often the complexity and power of the “Sphere” system could be confusing.
  • Limiting the powers and interconnections of Arcanum should make creating and balancing scenarios easier.

"The Ascension"

  • The very concept of "consensual reality" was both intriguing in itself and provided valuable fuel for role-playing magic use.
  • The full contact war between the Traditons and the Technocracy gave characters a compelling reason for different mages to work together.
  • The use of real world magical systems made creating and connecting with characters easier. The way they approached magic was easier to understand. The five Orders of "the Awakening" can seem rather bland by comparison.
  • The legends of various peoples around the world were immediately accessible for both rotes and story concepts.
  • The conjuctual effects system of combining spheres was both powerful and allow for great creativity on the part of players. It allowed even a beginning character to do very powerful things right from the start.

So, what do others who have experience with the two "Mage" systems think?


Ok ... just so you know .... my comment on the other thread about WoD was meant as bait for trolls. I'm greatly flattered that someone felt it neccessary to start a separate thread, but that just makes you the big fish that I caught.

;-)

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Ixancoatl wrote:

Ok ... just so you know .... my comment on the other thread about WoD was meant as bait for trolls. I'm greatly flattered that someone felt it neccessary to start a separate thread, but that just makes you the big fish that I caught.

;-)

Alright, but note my Avatar.

Besides, it is (IMHO) a worthwhile subject.


Lord Fyre wrote:
Ixancoatl wrote:

Ok ... just so you know .... my comment on the other thread about WoD was meant as bait for trolls. I'm greatly flattered that someone felt it neccessary to start a separate thread, but that just makes you the big fish that I caught.

;-)

Alright, but note my Avatar.

Besides, it is (IMHO) a worthwhile subject.

Ahhhh ... nicely done. I was not paying attention. Well played ... well played indeed.

(and new Mage sucks)

Liberty's Edge

Lord Fyre wrote:

The Ascension"

[list]
  • The very concept of "consensual reality" was both intriguing in itself and provided valuable fuel for role-playing magic use.
  • For this reason, I give it to the Ascension, hands down. For all the headaches the magic system started, it created a game where literally anything is possible.

    RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

    Ixancoatl wrote:
    (and new Mage sucks)

    Can you clarify your response? :D

    "Why does new Mage suck?"


    I believe too many people try to play the old Mage without understanding that you MUST have an interest in actually, personally examining the nature of the universe in order to make it work. Thinking it's just another game with rules and mechanics is inappropriate, and players who want to do that are really playing the wrong game.

    The fact that the New Mage codifies everything about the history of magic destroys the sense of wonder and mystery and the feeling that the universe truly *is* malleable to an indivdual's will ... which is the point of the original idea for Mage.

    RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

    Ixancoatl wrote:

    I believe too many people try to play the old Mage without understanding that you MUST have an interest in actually, personally examining the nature of the universe in order to make it work. Thinking it's just another game with rules and mechanics is inappropriate, and players who want to do that are really playing the wrong game.

    The fact that the New Mage codifies everything about the history of magic destroys the sense of wonder and mystery and the feeling that the universe truly *is* malleable to an indivdual's will ... which is the point of the original idea for Mage.

    But some would counter that it "is" a game, not a philosphy symposium. So it needs to work as a game.

    As the Kobold pointed out, the magic system of "the Ascencion" did cause headaches, for both players and storytellers.


    Lord Fyre wrote:

    But some would counter that it "is" a game, not a philosphy symposium. So it needs to work as a game.

    Then they need to play something else. Not all games are designed for everyone to play them. I'm not a bloodthirsty gamer, so I avoid things like 40K (also because I've never seen a 40K campaign go for more than 4 weeks without it falling apart over a rules dispute). I'm not gothy and angsty, so I don't play Vampire. If a gamer is not into philosophy, they shouldn't play Mage: the Ascension. Just because we are gamers, doesn't mean we *have* to play everything.

    I never had a problem with the Mage magick system, mainly because my big thing is coming up with outrageously unorthodox thing in a game and finding a way to explain them. If that's not for a particular gamer, they shouldn't play Mage.

    RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

    One thing that does bother me about the nWoD in general it the imposition of a "Morality" stat on all the character types (be it Clarity, Wisdom, Humanity, Primal Urge, etc.)

    It feels like that they are trying to shoehorn everyone into a particular style of play. But it is more restrictiive then D&D's Alignment system.

    Yes, actions should have consequences. But, their in-game systems seems a bit heavy handed.


    Lord Fyre wrote:

    One thing that does bother me about the nWoD in general it the imposition of a "Morality" stat on all the character types (be it Clarity, Wisdom, Humanity, Primal Urge, etc.)

    It feels like that they are trying to shoehorn everyone into a particular style of play. But it is more restrictiive then D&D's Alignment system.

    Yes, actions should have consequences. But, their in-game systems seems a bit heavy handed.

    Mage should be a game with a highly subjective rules system. When you try to codify it, it loses it's mystique.

    RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

    Ixancoatl wrote:
    Lord Fyre wrote:

    One thing that does bother me about the nWoD in general it the imposition of a "Morality" stat on all the character types (be it Clarity, Wisdom, Humanity, Primal Urge, etc.)

    It feels like that they are trying to shoehorn everyone into a particular style of play. But it is more restrictiive then D&D's Alignment system.

    Yes, actions should have consequences. But, their in-game systems seems a bit heavy handed.

    Mage should be a game with a highly subjective rules system. When you try to codify it, it loses it's mystique.

    And, I was also pointing out that the "Morality" system really boxes in different play styles - and can cause more then its share of arguements.

    Tightening the rules to make the "game" work better, I could go with. But, I think that White Wolf has got way too far here.

    (I never particularly liked it in Vampire. I always felt that the "Rep" system of the old Werewolf worked better for "punishing" bad character behavior.)

    Liberty's Edge

    Ixancoatl wrote:
    Mage should be a game with a highly subjective rules system. When you try to codify it, it loses it's mystique.

    Agreed! Relativism with dice!

    Dark Archive RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

    Personally, I prefer the nWoD Mage (Awakening). The codifying needed to happen. The old system was TOO wide open, allowing players to come up with insane combinations of crazy s!+@ that required way too much brain work on the part of the ST as to whether or not it should be allowed.

    Also, you can only use the ST fiat "It just doesn't work" so many times before your players become bitter about it. Inevitably, they ask "Well, what spheres would I need for it to work?" In which case, you must either answer them (and they immediately race to acquire said spheres) or you say "You just can't" and lose all respect.

    I also never really cared about the whole Technocracy/Ascension War thing. It seemed... a bit silly to me. And reminded me a bit too much of the Matrix. The whole "decendants of Atlantis" thing is way cooler, IMO, and hasn't really been done before in any major RPG I can remember.

    *waits for Sebastian to show up*

    Liberty's Edge

    Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

    Though I like The new Mage system, some of the things you state as in favor of the new system to me are actually things I liked about the old system.

    Lord Fyre wrote:


    "The Awakening"
    [list]

  • This version of Mage dispenses with the bloated oWoD over-plot. This also solves some of the conceptual issues with both the Marauders and the Technocracy. (The Nephandi were fine because selling one’s "soul" to evil is an ancient concept in many belief systems around the world.)
  • Stepping back from several real world religions helps to minimize the potential to offend several players – evangelical Christians, Native Americans, Wiccans, etc.
  • I loved the Metaplot in the old system, and it is one of the disappointing things in the new system since the pulled back from the Metaplot idea.

    I also loved Real world religions involved in the old systems *Vampire, werewolf, wraith etc*

    It added to the story and for me added more interest for the game.

    I miss especially the religious background that was so important to the Vampire game that is not in the new game.

    RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

    Fatespinner wrote:

    Personally, I prefer the nWoD Mage (Awakening). The codifying needed to happen. The old system was TOO wide open, allowing players to come up with insane combinations of crazy s@%& that required way too much brain work on the part of the ST as to whether or not it should be allowed.

    Also, you can only use the ST fiat "It just doesn't work" so many times before your players become bitter about it. Inevitably, they ask "Well, what spheres would I need for it to work?" In which case, you must either answer them (and they immediately race to acquire said spheres) or you say "You just can't" and lose all respect.

    The Sphere system of "Mage: the Ascension" was prone to lead to long arguments (so was the coincidental magic system). The new rules do reduce that considerably.

    However, conjuctual effects cast on the fly are not completely gone. Remember that high gnosis mages can cast such spells.

    Fatespinner wrote:
    I also never really cared about the whole Technocracy/Ascension War thing. It seemed... a bit silly to me. And reminded me a bit too much of the Matrix. The whole "descendants of Atlantis" thing is way cooler, IMO, and hasn't really been done before in any major RPG I can remember.

    Actually, aside from the "Morality" system, the Atlantian background is one of the things that did not thrill me about "Mage: the Awakening." "Mage: the Ascension" was – at its heart - about exploration and enlightenment; elements that could (and should) have been retained under any rules simplifications. "Mage: the Awakening" appears to be about plundering the bones of an ancient and largely forgotten empire.

    Fatespinner wrote:
    *waits for Sebastian to show up*

    Yes, me too. :D

    Scarab Sages

    I globally prefer the Ascension, even if the Awakening has better (tighter) rules, particularly for newbies to the concept of Mage (only exception is the Arcana of Death. I prefer Ascension's Entropy Sphere, conceptually speaking).

    Between the two though, I actually chose Awakening for the rules, and tweaked the background to fulfill my needs.

    I really dislike Awakening's background. It just sucks, because apart of Atlantis, it has actually nothing whatsoever to do with myths and legends of mages in the real world (unlike Ascension, with the Order of Hermes, the Sons of Ether, the Technocracy, Nephandi... all the traditions' backgrounds reminiscent of RL events, philosophies and phenomenons).

    Scarab Sages

    Lord Fyre wrote:
    The old system was TOO wide open, allowing players to come up with insane combinations of crazy s@%& that required way too much brain work on the part of the ST as to whether or not it should be allowed.

    For us, at our tables, most effects were allowed if the explanation made sense. After, backlash and such would still take effect as per the rules, obviously. We realized early on that Mage is not made for strict STs. You need to let your players explore all the crazy s@#t as you put it to take advantage of the game and really have fun.

    A ST who wouldn't be able to handle a lot of firepower in the hands of the players simply shouldn't run Ascension at all. The same way, players who need guidelines to extrapolate and aren't able to be creative with open-handed power themes should just avoid the game.

    RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

    The Red Death wrote:
    Lord Fyre wrote:
    The old system was TOO wide open, allowing players to come up with insane combinations of crazy s@%& that required way too much brain work on the part of the ST as to whether or not it should be allowed.

    For us, at our tables, most effects were allowed if the explanation made sense. After, backlash and such would still take effect as per the rules, obviously. We realized early on that Mage is not made for strict STs. You need to let your players explore all the crazy s@#t as you put it to take advantage of the game and really have fun.

    A ST who wouldn't be able to handle a lot of firepower in the hands of the players simply shouldn't run Ascension at all. The same way, players who need guidelines to extrapolate and aren't able to be creative with open-handed power themes should just avoid the game.

    B.T.W., you are mis-attributing Fatespinner's quote to me. :(

    However, I did say something that paralleled the same idea.

    Lord Fyre wrote:
    The Sphere system of "Mage: the Ascension" was prone to lead to long arguments (so was the coincidental magic system). The new rules do reduce that considerably.

    Dark Archive

    Lord Fyre wrote:
    Which is better Mage: the Ascension or Mage: the Awakening?

    I guess the question is 'better for what?'

    I prefer the old World of Darkness, because I really loved many of the original 'splats,' and many of them simply ceased to exist in the new game. It wasn't just a question of liking one Tradition, but often times there would be a half-dozen different factions within that Tradition that I just itched to play. Even the 'bad-guys' had some fascinating stuff, and I would have loved to play a New World Order (an evil teacher? Oh yeah.) agent or Progenitor or Syndicate member.

    The rules did need some dire tightening up, particularly in the cross-over sections where Vampires met Werewolves and 'Diablerie mills' and using Entropy to simulate every other Sphere and crud like that, but they didn't so much tighten and improve the brand as entirely recast it, losing me in the process. I didn't want to start over. So I didn't.

    I was also discouraged during the demo games White Wolf staffers ran at Origins. Everybody in the group failed every roll (one guy memorably botched a power and feared himself), my character, an expert at computers, failed both of the computers rolls he made, and the entire group of vampires was torn apart and sent running by a dog. Not a ghoul. Not a hellhound. A dog. Yeesh. If even the White Wolf staff can't make the game playable with the new difficulty numbers, what chance have I?

    When your demo game, meant to get people fired up for the new system / rules / setting scares people off? Bad sign.

    Scarab Sages

    Lord Fyre wrote:
    B.T.W., you are mis-attributing Fatespinner's quote to me. :(

    Oops. My mistake. What do you think of the post, though?

    RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

    The Red Death wrote:

    For us, at our tables, most effects were allowed if the explanation made sense. After, backlash and such would still take effect as per the rules, obviously. We realized early on that Mage is not made for strict STs. You need to let your players explore all the crazy s@#t as you put it to take advantage of the game and really have fun.

    A ST who wouldn't be able to handle a lot of firepower in the hands of the players simply shouldn't run Ascension at all. The same way, players who need guidelines to extrapolate and aren't able to be creative with open-handed power themes should just avoid the game.

    Unfortunately, "Mage: the Ascencion" can be an AWESOME experience if everyone is up to snuff. But, I have had the other experience also. :( "Mage: the Ascencion" can totally S**K if not everyone at the table is up to par. (Even one player can be ENORMOUSLY disruptive in that game.)

    RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

    Set wrote:

    I was also discouraged during the demo games White Wolf staffers ran at Origins. Everybody in the group failed every roll (one guy memorably botched a power and feared himself), my character, an expert at computers, failed both of the computers rolls he made, and the entire group of vampires was torn apart and sent running by a dog. Not a ghoul. Not a hellhound. A dog. Yeesh. If even the White Wolf staff can't make the game playable with the new difficulty numbers, what chance have I?

    When your demo game, meant to get people fired up for the new system / rules / setting scares people off? Bad sign.

    That is a very bad sign. It means that their core mechanic failed outright.

    As to "better for what?", I had meant either the setting, or the system.

    I had not gotten to actually play the nWoD (just read it and create characters), so I did not realize how potentially bad the system might end up being.


    The Red Death wrote:


    For us, at our tables, most effects were allowed if the explanation made sense. After, backlash and such would still take effect as per the rules, obviously. We realized early on that Mage is not made for strict STs. You need to let your players explore all the crazy s@#t as you put it to take advantage of the game and really have fun.

    A ST who wouldn't be able to handle a lot of firepower in the hands of the players simply shouldn't run Ascension at all. The same way, players who need guidelines to extrapolate and aren't able to be creative with open-handed power themes should just avoid the game.

    Exactly.

    As I said, not all games are for everyone. If your group works well together and gets into the esoterics of their characters, Ascension works great. If the group is made up of rules lawyers and powergamers, it will not work. We had a tremedously wonderful campaign with a ST and 3 players. It was a highly successful and rewarding games. I've also seen games die because players wanted to know "where the spells were". Those players missed the point of the games openness.

    Dark Archive RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

    Lord Fyre wrote:
    That is a very bad sign. It means that their core mechanic failed outright.

    I have not had this problem in my experience, having run one 20-session-long nWoD chronicle to date. Sure, the target number is now always 8, but 1s no longer cancel successes and the system asserts that "routine" tasks should not require a roll unless your character is completely untrained at them. Combat, obviously, should not be considered "routine" for these purposes, but most daily tasks should not require a roll. Yes, things which DO require a roll do fail on occassion, but if they didn't then what would the challenge be? Also, something to make sure you pay attention to is equipment bonuses. Pretty much any piece of equipment you can think of lends a bonus to something. Athletic shoes add a bonus to jumping. Having a crowbar gives 2-3 bonus dice on prying a door open. "Badass" sunglasses can lend a bonus on Intimidation. You have to pay attention to these things and, if you do, you'll find that your dice pools are not as static as they initially appear.

    Also, the nWoD system only makes room for "success" (1-4 successes) and "extraordinary success" (5+ successes on the roll) but my group has house-ruled in the previous edition's "degrees of success" where 3 successes signifies a more complete but less-than-absolute result when contrasted to a single success. This is a relatively easy fix and one I'm honestly kind of surprised to see did not make the transition.


    Personally, we prefer the new Mage. I cannot stress how much I love the new pulp-action feel to it.

    Of course, being a long-time old Mage player, I can see how it can appeal to some people more than the new one.

    The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

    I've played in a couple of original World of Darkness campaigns that had Mage: The Ascension overtones. Both of them were mature campaigns (and by that, I means "interested in both butt-kicking and exploring complicated philosophical issues that don't have clear-cut solutions" rather than "puerile") and in each I had a blast, making terrible mistakes ("My alleged ally just shot a man in cold blood; I must call the police and turn him in.") in the one and being deliberately under-powered ("My Avatar simply refuses to Awaken.") in the other.

    I don't know anyone local who's read the new World of Darkness books. I understand they're simpler and geared towards an audience that doesn't want as high a learning curve.

    But I'm of the opinion that Mage: The Ascension rewarded those who took the time to see it for what it was.

    Spoiler:

    And I'm still of the opinion that the Euthanatos revere an uncorrupted version of the Wyrm, and could probably do the Garou a world of good.

    And I'm also of the opinion that if the Order of Hermes had won their struggle against the nascent Technocracy of the White Tower, reality really wouldn't have been any more pleasant; we're not necessarily the good guys.

    And it had a cool Tarot deck, to boot!

    Dark Archive

    I prefer Awakening. Not only is the magic system better layed out (entropy was either overpowering or totally useless, depending on the STs opinion on it, every character had to start with arete 3 or be rather useless), but I also like the new setting. Ascension wasn't that bad either, but it was extremely preachy at times (same goes for apocalypse and dreaming).


    This

    spamhammer wrote:
    Lord Fyre wrote:
  • The very concept of "consensual reality" was both intriguing in itself and provided valuable fuel for role-playing magic use.
  • For this reason, I give it to the Ascension, hands down. For all the headaches the magic system started, it created a game where literally anything is possible.

    Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / Other RPGs / nWoD Mage vs. oWoD Mage – FIGHT! All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.
    Recent threads in Other RPGs