Chapter 8b - The Homefire

OOC: Yes, and the terms of the proposal do not seem to allow for boundaries permitting a refusal to consent, which is implicit in the Code, or else the Quaesitores would have Inquisition-level powers.

The questions should have a clear relevance to the matter at hand, and not be allowed to extend to what, to use an anachronistic colloquialism, would be termed a "fishing expedition". Magi are much more protective of their rights than virtually anyone else short of royalty. Unless it's the Church guarding what it perceives as its absolute right to judge the clergy (and everyone else).

Your concerns are noted and shall be adressed :wink:
The way I figured it, refusal means nothing more than having to pack your bags and leave.

I haven't reviewed the new version, but I am one of the folk who looks very closely at any 'submit to investigation' type powers. Honestly for a covenant to demand that in the charter, to me, makes the covenant seem paranoid and controlling.

Qs don't have those powers, and they are the 'official' investigators of the order. Why on earth would any mage consent to give his covenant more power over him than he is willing to accept from actual 'government' as it were? Think about that... seriously. Would you agree to give your fellow civilian boss the right to come in and investigate you as long as they thought they had a sufficiently serious 'case'? The Covenant, strictly speaking in hermetic terms, is not a governing body. It technically can act as one in the function it can serve as a minor tribunal, but the covenant itself ( the legal body formed by the charter and the governing rules ) is not. It is a civilian/corporate type legal entity. A contractual agreement between civilians.

Who the heck is going to agree to give their fellow civilians investigative/legal powers over them, by fiat of... the same people. Umm... not me?

Now I will go read the new version and see if I have anything more specific to add. :wink:

An anarchist commune? A tribal community?

Or a Family, a Gang, the Mafia, the Military, the Lodge, etceteras.

Ludo could always be the founder of the rival covenant accross the other side of the mountain range :smiling_imp:
(that idea is indeed interesting to me)

RE: Octavian

I don't find your comparison apt either. Likely we simply are not going to agree on this issue.

This is not a landlord/leasee type of arrangement. This is like a business / firm considering a new partner. But your point is taken, though I disagree. Covenants are the everyday living arrangements and resource management bodies of Magi in the Order. Not the governing bodies. While you make a good point of there not being a relevant regional tribunal at this time to over rule the minor tribunal of the covenant council... it doesn't actually have anything to do with the point that I made.

You also right in that in modern context some sensitive jobs have more security requirements than others. Believe me, I know that.

But the context here is completely different.

This is a society where there is no such thing as a search warrant. The police, the Qs, do not even have the right to search you. Or your sanctum. Or, without technically breaking the law themselves, do anything other than watch and wait, hoping you mess up if you are indeed the 'right' guy.

A Q searching your sanctum is still a legal kill, unless you have been marched. A politically suicidal kill? Possibly. Perhaps even probably. Much depends. But the point is that you can kick the guy out on the stoop, no questions asked, and probably even exact some manner of punishment to boot.

These are the 'official' investigators.

And there is supposed to be a back and forth cultural tension in the order that these guys have 'too much' power. Too Much? Compare/contrast this to a covenant that wants to require all members to submit to magical investigation on demand? It just doesn't seem logical or IC to me. It goes way beyond what the 'average' mage in the setting would be willing to accept IMO.

Not that this means the charter can not stand as it is. I agree, legally speaking, it is voluntary surrendering of your immunity. But I think the cultural connotations are being swept under the rug in favor of a more commonday view, and that annoys me.

I hope it doesn't come to such an impass.

And note that I don't find your comparisons entirely apt either. But I'm going to try and stay with the central point rather than digress.

Well, it appears we need more discussion. Only Falls, Octavian, Scott and Fixer have an actual vote. But the rest of you are the players that have to play according to the rules they make. Influence them , make yur opinions known. In game, we can have Ameline and Vares address Octavian (Octavian) and Viola (Scott/MT Knife).

I give my word that I will abide by the decisions you guys make

Understood it that way, this seems pretty logical.

"These are the rules here. You can accept them, and stay. If you don't, fine, there's no problem, we won't hold any hostility towards you for this, but we don't want you in our covenant."

Controlling? Nope.
Paranoid? Certainly :smiley:

Security, and Fear. Just as IRL

If a mage knows he has nothing to fear (he did nothing against the code) and is paranoid about diedne, diabolists, the order of suleiman, faeries infiltrators and such, he might, IMO, readily agree to this: You know you're probably safe there, not like that covenant over there, which, if you trust the villagers, is infested with a least one evil bay-eating magus. Despite the gift, there isn't smoke without fire, is it?

Another exemple? Dimir Taar, with his bloody magic, might have easily be mistaken for a diabolist or a druid. With such a investigation, his covenant mates knew his matter, and thereafter he, was clear.
He didn't enjoy it at all, but, paranoia-wise, perfectly understood the necessity to submit himself to the investigation in order for it to work, and, thereafter, his covenant mates knew they could trust him on this.

We're talking of a world with unknown ennemies and dangers, not the local grocery store.

RL doesn't have an Order of Odin or supernatural hazards :wink:

Real-Life wise? What security agency would give access to secure data to someone they hadn't screened first? What firm would ask for a firm to build important parts of, say, an Airbus without checking the firm's references before?

Hum. Covenant Charter here?

There are covenants when older magi have every right, junior magi none, they just wait, hoping to become themselves senior magi one day.

I also hope compromise can be reached. But if there is an impass, I want to retain you and your character in this saga. I value your excellent playing :smiley:

And my examples are totally apt. When you petition to join Lodge, they send an "Investigation Comittee" to come meet with you, discuss why you want to join and what some of your personal beliefs are (for example, it is a requirement that you believe in a supreme divinity aka God). And it also requires a unanimous vote to be accepted in the fraternity.
There is no hazing though. Thats a conspiracy theorist fallacy.

OOC: If you want an equivalent comparison in RL, think of it this way.

The community where you live, where you are supposed to have full rights as a citizen and, in fact, as perhaps one of the most powerful and influential beings of the age wants the authority to subject you to a (theoretically) almost flawless form of lie/truth detection, with the ability to ask you anything at all, and you do not have the power to refuse without being ejected from the community. When said community is within a society that offers its members far greater individual rights and protection, in theory, than the U.S. Consitution and all of its Amendments.

They could ask, "What kind of research are you conducting?" "Have you made any recent breakthroughs?" "Do you have any political ambitions to gain power in the Tribunal?" "Are you planning on challenging your Tremere sigil-holder to Certamen?" "Do you have a special technique that you believe will give you an edge?" "What is that edge?"

Refuse the question and you're ejected. It's not quite the same as being Marched, but it is a form of ostracisation all the same.

Never, EVER underestimate the chilling effect of that kind of unrestricted prying. If you ask me, it is most definitely a violation of the spirit of the original Code. A Transitionalist might argue in favour of it. A Traditionalist would not. As has been stated, Quaesitores do not have that kind of authority. I cannot see Magi being willing to cede it to others.

Vares will not. Not that kind of unrestricted prying. He is a Magus who knows full well the power of information. Of how political alliances can be built and broken on it. On how enemies--social and political, not just violent opponents--can be anticipated and outmaneuvered with it. Sharing it willingly is one thing. Being required to yield it up, without any restriction whatsoever, is absolutely unacceptable. Frankly, he'd sooner leave the Covenant and start up somewhere else than put up with that kind of mindset.

Really, how does it differ from requiring everyone to submit to a supposed Divine/Infernal test? Except that the Magi have greater control over the magic, and, theoretically, its results, when an Infernalist could lie perfectly and they've never know. Think of the poisonous effect that would have. Far from clearing someone, it only sows suspicion. Clever Diabolists can work it to manipulate the results of the spell to make others seem to lie--to any question--while they are shown to be telling the truth. Allowing unrestricted prying of that sort will only break down the cohesion of the Covenant.[/b]

Iteresting points, many things I did not consider.
I would point out that we are centuries away from the world-changing Declaration of Independance and the US Constitution, so some of your ideas are achronistic. We are also nowhere near England, where the American ideals originally came from. We are in Andorra, on the threshold of Spain. Spain, famous for the Inquisition :smiling_imp:

Still, I am taking these ideas and suggestions to heart, and will try to create a revision that will hopefully satisfy all :smiley:

Busy with work today. However, last night I started on a new revision of the membership rules, one that I think will satisfy everyone. I will post it tomorrow (or late tonight if my phantom connection is working, it comes and goes).

OOC: The Spanish Inquisition wouldn't begin for nearly four hundred years, though the early seeds of it would appear within a hundred. At the present time the region is known for its liberal and Libertine attitudes which the Inquisition aims to stamp out.

The Order is anachronistic, though its ideals can be traced back to Athens and Rome. Don't get me started on Ignem, though (Cold was deemed a property distinct from and opposing Fire, not an absence of it, as well as an active phenomenon in its own right; that's James Clerk Maxwell's thermodynamics, which won't be formulated for six hundred years; in this era, Cold should come under the heading of Auram or Aquam, not Ignem, with Perdo Ignem giving you "room temperature").

The members of Order think of themselves as being equal to the highest independent nobles or even royalty. The Magna Carta was only enacted a few years earlier, but nobles have been fiercely asserting their independence for centuries. In fact, in the "present" of the setting France is only just beginning to gain a strong monarchy after a period of extreme regional independence, and will only do so using the looted, gutted remains of the Langue'Doc. Louis IX will be a very weak king. It's actually his mother, Queen Blanche, who is the terror holding the country together. It was a posthumous canonisation campaign that revised the history of his reign.

Intriguingly, equality before the law can be found in some of Muslim legal philosophies of the era. The various sultans and other rulers worked to eliminate them, exercising brutal force and expecting to be praised regardless of their actions, but the concept is there. Of course, Emperor Claudius himself was known to disregard the law, observing that it was written by the powerful for the powerful and had very little to do with justice. The Hermetic Code was written by the Powerful for the Powerful in the presence of the Powerful, and its members do not allow their perogatives to be abridged lightly.

The order is made up of very strong individualists that want to keep their magic to themselves. Faerie magic is only Merenita, Heartbeast only to the Bjornaer, VErditious magic only to their house. EVery wizard has the right to keep their research and magic to themselves. THe Code is meant to provide a way for these individuals to band together and co-exist peacefully that they all grow more powerful but the type of questions mentioned above are why prohibitions against scrying exists.

Mages think they are above everyone else even kings at that: There are mages and there are mundanes (mundane has implied inferiority). It is one thing to have a series of questions with Parma down and spells to detect truth active that ask about the following things:

  1. are you mage in good standing?
  2. are you or were you ever diedne?
  3. are you or have you ever dealt with the infernal?
  4. What is your house?
  5. Who was your paren?
  6. Do you swear to uphold the laws and charter of this covenant?

That is it. That is the only reasonable extent of the inquisition and it should be done only once.

What mage would put up with Hazing and magical harassment? It is one thing if charter restricts all the rights and privileges to higher ranked, it is another if you are breaking the code regarding scrying and deprivation of magical power (by causing actual harm). Remember, this covenant is not part of either tribunal which makes it a prime target for a whole tribunal to march the outcast covenant and seize its resources and thus make the lands part of their tribunal. Break the code with your charter and someone disgruntled about it will report it to tribunal to get the covenant charged and marched.

To have differing levels of membership and such, you can have differing privileges (first choice of books/vis, amount of vis, choice of labs, resources for mundane luxuries/labs, good lab gear, etc) and you can have differing duties (1 season a year, 2 seasons a year, vis tithe, etc).

Any mention of trial has to be detailed what the trial is, any questioning/inspection has to fit with the code, Any accusation of high crimes to cause a trial should have same demands of truth inspection of the accuser before the resources are expended to try to one accused to prevent bogus accusations out of malice or desire to get into the other's lab or research.

You both have very excellent arguments. But you don't fool me one bit. It really has little to do with what you personally think, and your discourse on political sience is merely clever rhetoric.

The division is a simple breakdown...
The players whose characters are already members are pretty much all for magical investigation of new applicants.
The players whose characters are seeking to join the covenant, and thus would be subject to said investigation, are opposed to the idea.

I believe that if the situation were reversed, you would each have opposite opinions than the ones you currently champion.
:wink:

But it matters not. I am removing the contraversial phrases, and if my ghost connection holds I will be posting it latter tonight.

Okay. This thread has been a lot of OOC table talk, but I rationalize it as the topic has been what your characters have been discussing amongst themselves while they tool around at the covenant.

Anyway, I posted a new revision. This one was, um written by Rodrigo. He seeks out Octavian to discuss it :smiley:

OOC: Actually, Ameline has nothing to hide but she will not hold for her studies constantly being interrupted because yet another person wants to haze. She is more than happy to explain the theory of her magic. It is totally incomprehensible but she is willing to explain. Falls' character is already a member, Octavian is already a member and they are arguing harder than I am. The infernalist who is not and would be inspected (and most to lose) actually saw it as most reasonable of us. So your thoery doesn't hold up. Still I will read and comment.

OOC: Vares' magic is uniquely suited to the gathering of information--and to asserting his own independence from efforts to control him (Major Magical Focus: Libra Astrological Sign). His views would be expressed regardless of whether he was a full member or not, though by your earlier description I thought that "all" of the PCs were deemed members except those who were just introduced.

Ladyphoenix makes a point that occurred to me, too. Set a charter that threatens the parameters of the Code, and you'll have few if any defenders when Tribunals challenge the Covenant. They'll use it as a pretext.

I also agree with the questions she listed. The objection is to unlimited scrying/truthsaying, without any restrictions or requirements. Specific, immediate questions that do not delve into a Magus' (or Maga's) privacy, their personal research, or, indeed, anything transpiring within one's personal sanctum, and which have an immediate bearing on the viability of the Covenant might be permitted. Might. Because the Code doesn't allow even the Quaesitores' to insist on such questioning short of Certamen, and those who resort to it frequently will find themselves resented.

The hazing is another issue. This might occur during one's Apprenticeship, before one has the protections of full membership in the Order, and Magi may agree to it in order to join certain Houses (e.g. Tytalus) or Mystery Cults. The setting of a test for membership is certainly permissible, as long as it doesn't violate the Code. That doesn't include harassing and/or attacking a Magus or Maga, with the latter being a definite breach of the Code. I won't say that it doesn't happen in some places, but it is an unwise policy and one that will draw ire should it become generally known--as it would be, stated in a charter which the Tribunal or at least the Quaesitores probably has the right to review.

On a related point, wouldn't hazing qualify as threatening the dignity of a Magus? The central Code doesn't say anything on that point explicitly, but the Peripheral Code has several provisions citing it, including the prohibition on working for mundanes even if one isn't "interfering" because it was deemed to diminish the dignity of Magi.

What do you think of the revised version?