how would bookworms be used in ars magica?
think of little worms that eat books.
how would bookworms be used in ars magica?
It would lower the Quality score.
Range: Touch, Duration: Special, Target: Individual
CrAn 10 ?, Ritual
This spell creates a bookworm, that can be placed on a book. At that point the worm quickly consumes the book, growing fat and sluggish, in but a few minutes. The worm will only consume a single book, and needs no further feeding for its lifetime.
After about a week, the worm will start spewing a large cocoon around itself, fully a feet in diameter. The cocoon will be complete in about a month, completely covering its innards. If the finished cocoon is broken the eaten book will be found inside.
This spell was used by Nazarel to smuggle books inconspicously. He stopped using it after one of the worms was squished and perished.
(Base 1, +1 Touch, +3 Moon, +1 special duration)
Wouldn't that spell be a MuAn spell?
After all, what it really does is change a book to animal, and at the end of the duration, the book returns.
The way it changes seems to me to be a cosmetic effect.
I was thinking in terms of destroying and creating the book, but what it really does is MuAn. Right.
I would be inclined to dissallow this spell.
The effect is far to low given the complexity of the action. Plus it should have other requisits...aquam, terram, herbam and a further complexity increase. Frankly the whole spell comes accross as just wrong to me.
If you could magically copy books they would have no value. The order would have perfected the proceedure and the books would be available to the order as a whole en mass since once the spell was worked out even apprentices could do it. If books are copied and produced in the "old fashioned way" by hand then it is because magic isn't an effective substitute.
Recreating a book by magic should be an extremely vis intensive task...
step 1: CrAn to make the parchment
step 2: CrAq (finesse roll) to copy hmmm well that depends on how one defines individual but in principle every letter is an individual object of ink...so letter by letter you cast the spell checking your finesse roll each time. You might be able to argue your way up to several scentences but likely that is that.
step 3: CrAq (finesse roll) for each line in every diagram.
Repeat page by page...can you say twilight
And no I don't think I am being a jackass. CrAn(Aq) does not create a copy of a book...not without a finesse roll that would need divine or infernal intervention.
The key point is that a book is an extremely complex arangement of individual objects and evey book is essentially different from every other book...even copies of the same book are not the same as each will have subtle differences.
Well, it was just a thought.
Very possible. I was working without a book, and was guessing at base level. Aq and He requisites would make sense, too, and should raise the level - I wouldn't use Te or other requisites, though.
At its current version the spell essentially creates a magical animal that has the power to swallow a book and then transform into it. As such, I would be inclined to go with only a Vim requisite (without a magnitude increase). As a MuAn spell that effectively changes the book for a duration, Aq and He requisites (this time increasing magnitude) make sense, but personally I'd be inclined to ignore them (reasoning that An is the main form affected, much like I don't need Aq to change a person into a child even though he has blood flowing in his veins).
The spell doesn't let you magically copy the book, it just lets you temporarily transform the book into worm form. I think it has a nice flavor to it, and is not exploitive.
shrug I don't see that in the rules anywhere, but it's certainly a valid interpertation. I wouldn't be surprised if Covenants expanded on that.
At any rate the spell really shouldn't be CrAn as such; it should be MuAn with a non-standard Moon-like duration. Wouldn't you allow a book to be changed temporarily with an MuAn spell?
Corpus should cover blood, but I see no reason to not require Aquam to specifically cover ink. I don't feel there is any justification for not making it a requirement. Animal covers the parchment the ink is something else. Terram might or might not be required depending on the binding.
I doubt very much it is in the rules anywhere. But then the rules are hardly all encompassing and what specifically can and cannot be accomplished by magic varies from saga to saga.
With a MuAn(Aq) spell I would allow you to change a book. Otherwise I would only allow you to change the pages of a book, not the ink on those pages mind you...just the physical pages themselves. A book is paper and ink after all.
The question is exactly what constitutes in this case an individual...or inother words is a book and individual or is it a group. I would be inclined to say that the pages are individual and the book is a group...so you would need to effect a group of over 100 individuals...possibably several hundred. So this is not easy. And since every page of the book is individual and unique I see no reason to not insist on this. This should punch the magnitude of that spell through the roof.
The fact that mages use scribes to copy books instead of some low level CrAn(Aq) spell has to be for some reason...
Aquam is liquid, and if the ink on a book's pages is still in liquid form, you have a problem...
Most ink would be either He, An or Te depending on source (and Te should be able to cover all, as it is a solid inanimate material...)
Unually one should be able to get away without using any requisites for a spell of this kind, IMHO.
I was thinking of in terms of monster(what type of vim would you get).
IMO, that would depend on the kind of book they ate. Ate an Herbam book => Herbam vis!
I'd say Perdo -- they are entirely defined by the fact that they destroy books.
I'd say Intellego. They destroy books.
Just reading through discussions here of a book as an individual or a group ...
What delineates an individual?
It can't be complexity, variation of individuals or amount of deatil - as there are immensly complex things covered by 'individual' (like people - much more complicated than a book). Note that magic can also achieve some incredible levels of finesse / precision with reasonable ease - like duplicating the face of someone else for a disguse (and faces are VERY difficult to fake by mundane means - normal people can recognize a fake very easily if they have seen it).
Earlier - somewhere here - one of the criteria in another example was that the object be linked together - a single item that held together. Thus a brick is an individual, even though it is actually made up at some point of various grains of powder and what have you (depending on the type of brick) bonded together. It is not a group of a million plus grains (unless I am really mistaken as to how things work now).
I can see an intuitive argument for a book as an individual object ... I can refer to it as such: 'A' book - singular. It is linked together - you have to break it apart to get a page out.
So what is it - precisely - that makes a single book NOT an individual?
Maybe this was covered but I am too blitzed by studying to read properly
IMO, a book IS an individual. In fact, I would allow
Recovering the Damaged Tome
CrAn (req: He,Te) 60 Ritual
R: Touch, D: Momentary, T: Individual
Repair all damage to a single written tome.
(Base 35,+1 Touch, +2 Treated or Processed Products, +2 Requisites)
[spell taken from the Net Wizard's Grimoire wiki]
I wouldn't allow copying books through magic, a least not without hefty amounts of raw vis, for game balance and flavor reasons. (One can find plenty of excuses, but that's the essential reason.) But that's it.
Yes indeed - books should be rare as a setting thing. The laborious production process makes them sooo valuable.
Trading vis for books is O.K. as long as those books are worth it!
I would tend to think Magi would conceptually lean toward effects that made the scribing process easier / more effective.
Hired a mundane scribe you just can't trust? Some Rego Mentem will keep him thinking striaght throughout the process ... that's right - just copy - don't think about (or remember) the content - focus on an exact copy ... Hmmm what about a 'zombie' scribe?
how about a mummy scribe(would last longer probibly)