Tabletop RPG · since 1987 · #62 most discussed

Ars Magica

Play powerful wizards, their companions, and grogs in a medieval covenant, with troupe-style play and seasons of study between adventures.

Its own systemHistorical fantasystep dicedowntimefaction playdomain playgenerational playpoint buyCampaignsNeeds a GM

5.6

Geek rating

From 4 firsthand play reports in 2 r/rpg threads. The threads alone average 6.3.

Player rating— / 10

No visitor ratings yet.

Discussion6.1 / 10

146 r/rpg posts named it, October 2023 to October 2026.

Rules weight

Very heavy. Hype 2.4 for its age.

Have you played it?

Rate Ars Magica from 1 to 10. One rating per browser and device; you can change it any time.

Didn't work for usOne of our best

What players say

At the table

The notes hold little firsthand play: about five reports across three threads, and one of those says only that the poster has played a lot. What there is points to a game that rewards a wizard-focused group but asks a lot of its rules, and the experience varies by edition.

What works

Second edition felt story-first to one poster, more "the tale of some wizards" than spell-construction mechanics. (thread)
Fourth edition has carried a long-running quasi-Dresden Files game for a few years. (thread)
Older editions don't feel broken to the posters using them, even if the magic math is less tight. (thread)
One GM found the system worth the teaching effort, kept running it, and wants a revised edition. (thread)

What tables struggle with

Fifth edition was too crunchy for two groups, and one of them bounced off it. (thread)
One poster found fifth edition dry, with mechanics used for their own sake instead of serving the fiction. (thread)
The rulebooks are heavy for casual groups. (thread)
The fifth edition core book's layout is disorganized, and teaching adult players took two sessions of four hours or more. (thread)

Who it suits

Groups that want to play scholarly wizards and will put in the time to learn the rules.
Tables that prefer an older edition's looser magic math to fifth edition's crunch.

In players' words

"My group bounced off of 5th, but I had a copy of 2nd edition back in the day and we've been playing around with that" (thread)
"Second edition felt juicier, more like it was the tale of some wizards first and an exercise in spell construction mechanics second." (thread)
"the flow of the book is a bit *stream of consciousness*" (thread)

The threads behind it

Each thread is rated for the play it describes, from the firsthand reports in it. Load one here or read it on Reddit.

6.5

Rule light system in the style of "Mage"/"Ars Magica"

The thread is mostly about alternative lighter systems, with only a few firsthand Ars Magica reports. Those say 5th edition was too crunchy and dry for one group, while 2nd edition felt more story-driven and 4th edition has worked for years in a quasi-Dresden Files setting. 3 firsthand · 46 comments

Open on Reddit

5.5

Ars Magica definitive edition Backerkit is up

The thread is almost entirely about the Backerkit crowdfunding for the Definitive Edition, covering price, licensing, and other crowdfunds, with almost no table-play reports. The one firsthand voice says the 5th edition book's disorganized layout meant teaching adult players took two 4+ hour sessions, which suggests a steep learning curve. 1 firsthand · 70 comments

Open on Reddit

—

I don't think anything will ever challenge mage or ars magica.

The thread is mostly about Mage (Ascension and Awakening) and about whether other systems can match the 'powerful wizard' feel. The only Ars Magica firsthand claim is one commenter saying they have played a lot of it, with no description of what happened at the table, so there is nothing to rate. 1 firsthand · 57 comments

Open on Reddit