That said, if maga Alix is challenged by magus Bobus at certamen, instead of refusing, she can always propose outlandish conditions under which she's very likely to win. Bobus at that point might disagree... and Alix challenges him to a meta-certamen do decide the conditions under which the primary certamen is fought. If Bobus declines the meta-certamen, then Alix can impose the conditions she wants on the primary certamen. If Bobus accepts, then Alix challenges him to a meta-meta certamen to define the conditions of the meta-certamen.... and so on.
Basically, Alix has the choice of stalling forever, or getting the primary certamen run under her conditions. To be fair, Bobus might bring the case up at the next Tribunal. At which point the entire issue will probably be won by political skill rather than by certamen
Since the whole point of Certamen (at least initially) was for two magi to settle a dispute without bringing it to court or going straight to WW, and given it's central position in House Tremere strength, it's likely that Tremere himself developed a set of accepted rules as OneShot is proposing. These rules were probably iterated by the later generations, but wouldn't be too different from the original, I suppose.
They should be something that can be easily adjudicated as "fair" by any two magi, even in the absence of other witnesses (that it was a fair duel is something that can be subjected to Quaesitorial Endersement at Tribunal if later required).
What constitutes "fairness" also brings a few other cases not discussed above. For example, a challenge to a wounded magus is fair? To a tired one? The Certamen must be conducted right after the challenge was issued, or should a day be agreed upon? There is probably a "standard" etiquette to be followed, even if we are not agreeing on one. =9
I'm inclined to say that everything that is allowed on a Wizard's War is valid on Certamen, just because if not, it is sometimes more advantageous to use WW to settle issues. So magic items, familiars and apprentices, if these can somehow help, are fair play; another magus intervening is not. This isn't my final opinion yet, I shall think a bit more... And this is probably not applicable to some specific cases.
My impulse is to asnwer no, but it seems this contradicts what I said about Wizards War...
Then I'll update my opinion as follows: do you consider a grog to be part of the magus magical power? Anything that is part of a magus magical power should be allowed. Anything that is not should be prohibited.
I don't agree with the premise that Wizard's War may be preferable. Wizard's War is a serious investment of time, and a serious risk of death or injury too. Certamen can be settled before midday with bounded stakes.
But thanks for your consistent and playable take on it, even if my take remains different.
That seems unlikely, given that certamen canonically follows different rules in different circumstances (in terms e.g. of Art veto, or of selection of Technique and Form) and that canonically there are disputes on the legality of this or that technique.
I would add that the rest of the Order would probably look at some Tremere proposal on certamen rulles with extreme distrust, after the domination. I can definitely see the Tremere having their own rules from when they duel among themselves though.
Grogs can have mystical powers, in which case they'd definitely be considered part of the magus' magical power - allowing them to distract the opponent! Also, who says that mundane resources can't win a wizard's war?
I think a more workable rule would be: anything goes, with the consent of the recipient. So friends and allies of a duelist can lend him magical powers, heal him, replenish his fatigue etc. but they cannot otherwise affect his opponent - not even wagging their tongues to distract him.
My problem is that if I'm willing to pay a few Corpus vis for a healing Ritual afterward, I cannot lose Certamen with the right active Corpus/Mentem spells outside of random botch chances, which I can also minimize.
I would like to point out that Magi can not benefit from any Item of Virtue. To gain the benefit of an Item of Virtue, one must not possess any form of Magic Resistance. Since a Magus has inherent Magic Resistance equal to their Forms, they therefore fall into the group unable to use an Item of Virtue.
Being within an AotH, no matter its power level, will also supress any Item of Virtue.
Anyone looking for this information can find it in RoP:M, page 125 in the first paragraph under the formula for calculating the Enrichment Total and Level.
You are incorrect about Items of Virtue and magi. They work fine for magi if they are crafted by the owner and included in the Talisman, with no need to penetrate. Read that section again, specifically for the Talisman exception.
EDIT: To avoid spamming the thread. The Item of Virtue must be enchanted as the Talisman to work. Adding it to an existing Talisman is not the same thing...
First edition certamen rules allowed for multiple magi on each side. It's been a while since I've looked at them but I believe you just add the arts together and make one roll. Damage is spread evenly, opponents choose who takes any extra that can't be spread evenly. I don't know why conceptually this wouldn't work in 5e, except perhaps wonkiness with radically different character builds being better or worse somehow.
If you really want to go that route, combining certamen rules and group combat rules will probably work with only a little simple tuning.
To me, certamen is an incarnation of the honourable duel, a trope found in so many stories from both medieval and other settings. Outside help makes sense only as cheating.
All you really need is a non-Mutantum version of The Tireless Flight. Now you can take unlimited Fatigue loss at the expense of a pile of Minor Wounds. That can be healed by a single Ritual, or even a non-Ritual CrCo recovery bonus for a week if there aren't overly many. And no penalties to the combat from the Fatigue loss and wounds. You only lose if you lose concentration, and you can get bonuses there. Trivial for everyone to pull off. So if both sides are willing to spend a little vis, it's purely random, and if only one side is, then the other nearly automatically loses. It becomes stupid.
Even if you don't want to spend the vis, you do this anyway and forfeit if you get to a certain point. You do better and no free bypassing PM with a spell at the end. It still becomes stupid.
You know what? I had never fully read that spell - after a cursory glance I assumed it was just a Mutantum version of Endurance of the Berserkers (which lets you act as unfatigued until you run out of fatigue levels).
EDIT: I guess you could (and should!) still interpret it that way: i.e. it eliminates fatigue and wound penalties, not Unconsciousness or Incapacitation, in that it "only masks the feeling". Thus, if you undertake some activity that would tire you "beyond" unconscious, you still go unconscious but also take 1 Light Wound / extra fatigue level (I would still have preferred the same scale of damage as from spell fatigue, but that's a relatively minor quibble).
Otherwise to me it seems in dire nide of errata: it both runs against the spirit of the guideline as exemplified by Endurance of the Berserkers and is exceedingly unbalancing in many areas beyond Certamen. Has anyone brought it to David Chart's attention at some point?
One cannot safely conclude, that there really is a non-Mutantum version of this spell: a Super-Endurance of the Berserkers, which also lets one still act beyond one's last fatigue level.
Given its obvious potential for abuse, such a Super-Endurance of the Berserkers should just not exist beyond Mutantum magic, where it helps redcaps to reach their destination no matter what and in what state.
But one might overlook this finer point and get one's saga saddled with a non-Mutantum Super-Endurance of the Berserkers. So a remark in (HoH:TL p.102 The Tireless Flight) about the impossibility to remove Boosted, Harnessed and Tethered from it and make it into non-Mutantum spell is helpful.
