I've tried to draft a Covenant Charter that takes into account the unusual nature of the covenant. Let me know what you think. I used the one from Covenants as a template and simplify it a little bit. Still it is fairly long, which is why I'm starting a new topic to discuss it.
Being the charter of the Covenant of ________ in the Year _____ of Our Lord, Jesus Christ.
I pledge my support and loyalty to the Covenant of _______, and declare that the trials and fortunes of this covenant are now my own. Just as I am pledged to the Oath of Hermes, so do I pledge the covenant to the Order of Hermes. I swear to uphold and protect this covenant regardless of the personal price.
Over all the years of my life and throughout my studies and travels, I will neither betray the covenant nor give aid to its enemies. In times of need, I will aid the covenant in whatever way I am able, and I will devote myself to its service if the need is clear. I will abide by the decisions of the rulings of this covenant, and I will treat these decisions as if they were my own. I will treat my fellows with respect and fairness, and I will not attempt to harm them in any way. Their blood is my blood. Where the covenant stands, there do I stand; how the covenant grows, so do I grow; should the covenant fall, then do I fall. This I so swear, upon the honor of my house and its Founder.
Given under our hand, ___________
The covenant allows for two types of membership of its council, and recognizes a third status, which it offers to visitors to the covenant.
The status of Protected Guest may be extended to any person by the formal invitation of a single member of the covenant. Protected Guests are afforded the basic rights detailed by this charter, and are not obligated to the Council, nor are they a member of this council. They have no voice nor vote unless granted such by the council’s head, the Princeps . The status may be may be revoked by the member who granted it, by the princeps , or by a vote of the Council.
The status of Member is extended by the princeps or by unanimous vote of the Council. Members have the basic and full rights detailed by this charter, and the duties therein attached. Membership persists, unless abridged through censure or canceled through expulsion.
The status of Princeps can only be held by one who traces his line to Leonardus of Jerbiton. The princeps has the basic and full rights detailed by this charter, and the duties therein attached. The status of Princeps can only be granted or revoked by a majority vote of the heirs of Leonardus of Jerbiton. Should the line of Leonardus die out, this Covenant shall be dissolved and its resources shall become the ownership of House Jerbiton. This clause cannot be changed by the Council.
Should a magus ever come to desire release from this covenant, he must renounce his Oath of Covenant in the presence of at least two members of the Council, and shall thereby be relieved of all duties and rights, and may not call upon such rights furthermore.
Governance of this Covenant
The members of this covenant are governed by the Council of Members (the Council), which shall consist of all Members of the covenant plus the Princeps . This council shall not declare action except on behalf of the entire membership of the covenant; no action may be demanded of individuals by council agreement. The Princeps can overturn any ruling of the Council that was not reached by otherwise unanimous vote. The rulings of the Council cannot be overturned by an individual Member.
Any Member shall have the right and duty to convene the Council for consideration of matters justly grave, and all members shall be charged with attendance and diligence in the proceedings.
Should it not be possible to convene the full Council, any quorum consisting of more than half of its current members is considered valid; else the discharge of the council’s duty must be delayed until such time as the full council may be convened. The Council shall convene four times each year, one day prior to each equinox and solstice, regardless of call from any member, and all members of the covenant should endeavor to make themselves present.
Motions to be decided upon by the Council must be introduced by a member; debated fully and justly, allowing those who wish to speak to do so; and then proposed for the vote. Proposals must be seconded by another member of the covenant, else no vote can take place. All issues shall be passed by a majority vote of the members there present; excepting that the unanimous opinion of the Council is required for issues involving changes to the charter; and expulsion of a member.
The duties of the princeps are to attend regular meetings of the council; to keep order at meetings; to break tied votes with a discretionary casting vote; to determine the yearly surplus of provision and store; and to act as a spokesman for the Council. In dire circumstances, the princeps shall be empowered to rule on matters on the covenant’s behalf.
Resources Owned by this Covenant
Resources of this covenant are held in common by the Council , and it is the responsibility of this council to maintain and defend them.
The covenant lays claim to all the vis originating from sources inherited by the heirs of Leonardus and administrated by the covenant, as long as it pays the heir their rightful share of one pawn for every four harvested. This covenant lays claim to all the vis originating from undisputed and unclaimed sources discovered by members of the council; save for the first harvest of a new vis source, which belongs to the finder or finders. This covenant also lays claim to any vis gifted to the Council as a whole. In all other situations, undisputed and unclaimed vis belongs to the finder or finders.
This covenant lays claim to all books obtained by members of the council while acting at the behest of the Council, and all books scribed by members of the Council where payment was received for this scribing from the covenant’s resources. This covenant also lays claim to any texts gifted to the Council as a whole.
This covenant lays claim to all magical items obtained by members of the council while acting at the behest of the council; and all magical items made by members of the council where payment was received for this manufacture from the covenant’s resources. This covenant also lays claim to any magical items gifted to the Council of Members as a whole.
This council lays claim to all monies generated using the resources of the covenant. This council also lays claim to all monies obtained by members of the council while acting at the behest of the council. This covenant also lays claim to any monies gifted to the Council as a whole.
This council lays claim to the buildings, defenses, chattels, and inhabitants of the covenant. This council also lays claim to any such buildings, defenses, chattels, and inhabitants gifted to the Council as a whole.
Surplus resources of the covenant will be determined at the Winter meeting of the Council. Resources necessary for the continued existence of the covenant and the protection of its members’ rights are accounted for first; this includes payment for seasons of work performed on behalf of the covenant, the yearly payment of vis to each Member and a stipend of vis for the casting of the Aegis of the Hearth . Contributions to all debts owed to the covenant, as well as reasonable reserves, are decided by the princeps , and set aside. The remaining resources are deemed surplus, and shall be allocated to the settlement of requests from each member of the covenant.
Rights of the Members of this Covenant
Each and every member of this covenant and protected guests shall be entitled to the basic rights of the covenant; to whit, full and unrestricted access to the protection and support of the covenant within the boundaries of the covenant by all the rights and benefits accorded by the Code of Hermes, the benefit of a sanctum which shall remain inviolate and the supply of materials thereof, and victuals appropriate to the status of a magus. These basic rights shall not be abridged except by expulsion.
In furtherance and additional to the basic rights, a Member of the covenant shall be entitled to the full rights of the covenant; to whit, the right to presence and a vote in the Council, which he shall exercise dutifully with due prudence. Further, full and unrestricted access access to the library of the covenant, and the services and skills of the servants and covenfolk. Further, a yearly payment of three pawns of vis. Further, an equal right to all surplus provision and store necessary to conduct his studies, or the travel demanded by those studies; such rights to include (but be not limited to) vis, monies, and diverse magical and mundane resources claimed by the covenant. Where a conflict is evident between members of the council over the allotment of surplus resource, distribution is drawn by ballot; excepting that priority claims that have been advanced and agreed by the princeps are taken into consideration prior to the ballot. These rights shall not be abridged except by decision of the Council under conditions of grave concern.
Responsibilities of the Members of this Covenant
Members of this covenant are obligated to obey the Oath of Hermes and the Peripheral Code, as demanded by the Oath of Covenant; failure on this account will not be tolerated by the Council, and the covenant reserves the right to censure those members who are convicted in just Tribunal of an offense against the Order of Hermes.
The responsibility of the members of this covenant towards its lasting success is dependent on service to the covenant. The Council will declare the duties that need to be performed at the regular meetings of the covenant. Such duties include (but are not limited to) the safeguarding and harvesting of the covenant’s claimed vis sources, the safeguarding and harvesting of the covenant’s income, the wellbeing and discipline of the covenant’s employees, the maintenance of the covenant’s resources, the increase of the covenant’s resources, and the maintenance of good relations with the covenant’s allies. Duties that will not entail more than a week of service at low personal risk will be assigned by the council to its members, with no more than one being assigned to each member in each season. Such assigned duties attract no recompense or advantage to the member who discharges them, but cannot be refused without reasonable extenuation.
Duties which will entail a higher investment of time or personal risk will be offered up for service by the covenant. These services will attract a remuneration which shall be commensurate with the time, risk, and potential benefit to the covenant. This remuneration is decided by the princeps , but maintains a minimum payment which shall be, for a single season of work at low risk with a low gain, two pawns of vis, of the flavor most prevalent in the stores at the time. The Council may increase the remuneration to increase the attractiveness of a particular urgent task, for it is not empowered to force a member to accept one of these duties unless failure to perform it would be in breach of this covenant, in which case the threat of censure may be employed. All payments will be made in the Spring meeting of the Council. If there is more than one claimant for the service, and each claimant refuses to share the duty, then the princeps will assign the duty by ballot. If there is insufficient vis to meet the demands of the council, the princeps may withhold payment for one or more years. Covenant work may be declared such retroactively.
Censure of the Members of this Covenant
If a Member should contravene the decisions of the council, by vote or by charter, then the member may be censured or expelled by a vote of the Council. Censure requires the passing of a motion at a meeting of the Council. The censure of a member remains in effect for a year. It suspends the yearly payment of vis and serves as a warning that further transgressions will subject the Member to expulsion. The status of a Protected Guest may be withdrawn at any time by a vote of the Council or by the princeps without need for censure. The princeps cannot be censured.
Expulsion is enacted by a unanimous vote of the remaining Council. Expulsion is the only means through which a member of the covenant shall lose his basic rights; and requires that the former member ceases to draw upon those basic rights subsequent to the first full moon after expulsion was enacted. Should a magus be cast out from the Order, it is the duty and obligation of this covenant that he shall also and without delay be expelled from this covenant. The princeps cannot be expelled.
Am I mistaken or does Certamen not supercede any and all clauses in a charter? Certamen being the final arbiter of anything. Not that I see it happen, but stipulations in the charter saying: "This clause cannot be changed by the Council." might make a Quaesitor furrow his brow, and kindly ask for a revision.
Well, it is the clause that specify the princeps is designated by the heirs. It is their inheritance that is being used to found the covenant, so they want to keep a hold on it. If the Council could just eliminate the status of Princeps, or change the way he is selected, they would quickly lose that hold and everything else would quickly follow. So in this instance a Quaesitor would certainly recognize that clause as valid.
Certamen cannot be used to supercede the clauses of the charter, because each member swears an Oath to follow the charter. If they challenge it after swearing to follow it, they are breaking their Oath.And a non-member has no ground to challenge the Charter, because it does not force them to do anything.
Certamen is not the final arbiter of everything. It can only be used for a personal dispute between individual magi. Not a dispute with your own covenant, nor the ruling of a Tribunal.
Fair enough - I shall read the charter more closely, and give my view on it
What happens if the heirs decide to revoke the charter and kick everyone out? I may have missed it but I see no provisions protecting a Magi's lab equiptment, notes, etc. If I spend decades improving a lab and writing notes, then the heirs remove me and keep all that stuff because coven coin paid for it, that doesn't sound very appealing.
I see similar concerns arising over new vis sources.
I understand and respect the risk in losing access to a coven's resources due to bad behavior or even the vote of people you interact with routinely...but losing it all because of the whims of magi you've never even met?
The risk/reward still might well attract magi...but it might also encourage the hiding of resources.
We also need to address personal vis sources and "inhabitants" of the coven. If a magi captures and trains a Beast of Virtue or summons an elemental? Maybe I recruit a personal servant I really get along with or get married and have children. What about a favorite Shield Grog? Are we expected to abandon them if expelled?
I get that the players would likely be understanding in all of these situtaions, but Magi aren't known for being trusting...well mine is...but he isn't the one bringing this all up!
I think the phrases "at the behest of the council" and "with the use of covenant resources" cover that to a large extent, as does the basic Code regarding sanctums. Essentially it means that you only want to use vis granted as salary, rather than what happens in many covenants where people just get together and say, "Can I use X vis to get Y?" which would be ambiguous in regard to using covenant resources.
Maybe there should be a clause making it clear that the covenant makes no claim on the contents of the sancta or on magical property found or owned by the resident magi?
A magus' sanctum and its content (lab, notes, etc.) are all generally recognized (as in by the Peripheral Code) as the personal possession of a magus. He may have to pack his stuff and leave, but he gets to leave with his stuff. Anything that is distributed from surplus resources every year stop being owned by the covenant - it has been distributed.
Vis sources discovered during by the members belong to the covenant -- that's a fairly standard clause.
The vis sources which were part of the inheritance, on the other hand, belong to the heirs. They expect the covenant to harvest them and pay them a quarter of it (which is a great deal for the covenant).
There's no clause that allow the heirs to unilaterally dissolve the covenant. Thet only situation where the covenant would be dissolved is if all of them -- and their own heirs -- are killed. So the dissolution clause is there to prevent a ruthless group of members from assassinating all of the heirs to take full control of the inheritance.
This is another standard clause. People and sentient beings have free will. They can leave if they want to. The clause is more about protecting them, as claiming as the covenant's means any attack by other magi is covered by the Code of Hermes.
Regulus Petraeus of House Guernicus will propose a few additions to the Charter as soon as possible. These relate to his personal objective of changing apprentice rights in the Order, and his first step is to have a Tribunal with additions to the Periphereal Code granting more rights to apprentices. He expects that including these in the charter can be used latter as a precedent that giving more rights to apprentices is viable and works, and will openly discuss this with anyone who asks.
Speaking as a player, there is no need for the members of the covenant to agree. This is Regulus' personal agenda. If the motion is failed he will take it as practice for the Tribunal and try to slowly make the other magi understand that this is for the benefit of the Order, and to understand what are the reasons for their disagreement so that he can address them as soon as possible. It is entirely possible that Regulus will ultimately fail in his objective, and that would be no problem to me.
These are (loosely) based on how things are done in Thebes. The intent is to protect apprentices and give incentives to the magi to not be jerks, without burdening them too much.
Should a member of the covenant find a Gifted child, he (the finder) will not claim her as an apprentice to himself, but instead convene the Council and present the child to the attending members. Any of the members present is in their right to talk to the child, ask questions and investigate their Gift. Any member without apprentices is in his right to offer himself as a potential master. He can explain his arts and interests and talk of what he will teach the child, but he can not use mundane or magical coercion to direct the child decision.
The child will chose which of the potential masters she accepts. If she does not chose the finder, the new master must provide a single season of service in benefit of the finder, with no cost to himself other than time, to be requested and accomplished in no more than seven years. If both parts cannot arrive at a consensus on the season of service, it shall be converted in seasons of service in benefit of the covenant, with the master accomplishing the finder’s duties until a full season of service is paid. If she chooses no one, the finder becomes the master.
If all the present members already have apprentices, any member may offer to be the child’s master. If no member of the covenant wants an apprentice, the Gifted child can be directed to a friendly covenant where she shall be respected and well treated.
An apprentice to a member of the covenant shall have the status of half-magus and half-member. As such, she is entitled to a half-vote on council, and to be paid half of the same amount his master receives. Any damages made against an apprentice, by any member of this covenant, shall be trialed in court as a high crime, as if conducted against a full magus.
An apprentice can lodge a complaint against his master to any magus of this covenant, who is legally obliged to present the complaint to the Tribunal for investigation. A member of this covenant is entitled to double of the vis grant in 7th year of his apprentice, if he trains his apprentice for 7 years without receiving complaints.
The apprentice is not, within the Order, a full magus. Any crimes committed by the apprentice are still the responsibility of the master. An apprentice cannot be taught the Parma Magica before his gauntlet is complete and he has swore the Oath of Hermes. An apprentice must abide by any reasonable teaching schedule his master decides.
A Bonisagus has the right to claim the apprentice for himself, but this does not excludes the necessity of a season of service in benefit of the finder. If a Bonisagus of this covenant claims an apprentice of a magus from another covenant, there is no season of service to be paid, but the apprentice still has the duties and rights of a half-member. The same is true if a magi that already has an apprentice joins the covenant.
Other parts of the Charter may need minor revisions if this additions are accepted.
Are we roleplaying the apprentice change meeting or do I simply protest against those changes ooc?
I'm not against roleplaying our Council meetings, but in this specific case I think that roleplaying "legalese" could be a bit tiring (especially if everyone is as hyped to explore the covenant as I am XD). I think that for now we could just discuss it OOC and later, in play, give a simplified description of the discussion and call for a vote.
Future discussions about changing the charter (if there are any) would receive a bit more of screen time.
As I said, my character won't like the idea of changing the rules in the way you proposed.
Choose your own master:
Eikona won't go looking for an apprentice if we change this rule. For a Jerbiton, finding a Gently-Gifted apprentice is very important. Convincing a 7-10 year-old child to like someone better can easily be done even without magic. To make sure that everyone is motivated to find an apprentice, she'll suggest that throughout the apprenticeship, the the winter season's service of the apprentice belongs to the finder and that the finder is owed two seasons of service, three if the child is gently gifted.
More importantly: If her own son should turn out to be Gifted (a mother never stops hoping), it would be easier for other magi to take him away. She'll insist on an addition that excludes family members from being shared.
Secondly, she'll insist that only competent magi (5+ in all arts) can train an apprentice at all.
Thirdly, she is against giving an apprentice any vis.
Fourth, an apprentice claimed by a Bonisagus has no rights if he is not taught at the covenant.
Speaking as the Alpha SG (representing the setting), there are many potential problems with that proposition.
- It assumes that the child wants to become an apprentice to any of the members (or even at all).
- It diminished the incentive for a magus to go looking for an apprentice.
- It is incompatible with the traditions of some of the Houses (Tytalus with their hard training regimen, Mercere with the blood of their founder, Jerbiton with the Gentle Gift, to name just a few).
- It gives the apprentice power over their master ("if you don't do this I will lodge a complaint against you!")
- It may create ill-will between the magi of the covenant, if one of the magi convinces a child to become his apprentice instead of the magus who found the child
- Some might even say it is a deprivation of magical power, since you are infringing on the right to take an apprentice.
The best avenue for changing the way apprentices are treated would probably be the Lotharingian Tribunal, as this new Tribunal could set its own rules regarding apprentices.
EDIT: One more problem. "Loss of apprentice" is a punishment option for some crimes. Do we now need to ask the apprentice before we impose it? And to whom the apprentice is granted (usually the injured party)?
Agreed to all, except that, again: this is mostly how Thebes does things, and there it works (they use a particular system to account for merits and demerits of the magi instead of seasons of service, and that is also used when chosing apprentices, but Regulus thought that would be too much).
The Tytalus way is protected by Theban Periphereal Code (Regulus will be against this unless he needs it to gain Perion approval), just as Bonisagus Rights. Other houses have the option to bid higher for an apprentice in Thebes in order to secure the ones they have more interest (gentle Gifted, faerie blood, already knows a craft, etc; the apprentice gets the bidded value, not the finder), which is not possible under the proposed system. Maybe an opportunity for revision.
Regulus will present this motion and it will be rejected. No hard feelings. Back to square one. He expected resistance.
That depends. Regulus first option is to change the rules in an already strong Tribunal (Rhine, Alps, Normandy), not to create a new one that might not have much sway at Grand Tribunal later. I'm honestly unsure of how he will proceed.
This is a decision for the Tribunal. If the Tribunal makes a decision, the magi must comply. The main focus of the proposed amendments to the charter are to give a "half-magus" status to apprentices. So, if the Tribunal rules that someone loses an apprentice, no one has the right to complain (and doing so would be a High Crime), apprentice included.
EDIT: actually you can complain, either to Grand Tribunal or to Magvillus. Appeals to Magvillus usually end with worse results. Grand Tribunal happens once every 33 years, and it is unlikely that you will convince another Tribunal to try to change the decisions made against you at your current tribunal, but sure you could try...
Eikona's points were noted and shall be addressed at a further motion for changing the Charter.
Thebes, however, is a Tribunal, not a lone covenant. Scale matters when instituting such a system. Trying to duplicate this on a covenant level simply cannot work, because the burden cannot be spread over a dozen covenant and a hundred magi. It is the Tribunal who rewards the magus who finds a Gifted child. When gathering a dozen Gifted child, with more potential masters than there are children, then some sort of "supply-demand" matching process can take place. A single child, with only two of three potential masters, will not be conductive to good fits.
Furthermore, Regulus proposes giving more rights to apprentices than even Thebes does. Theban apprentices do not receive vis (that's like giving a gun to a child), do not get a vote in covenant business (that is like giving a 10-year old the right to vote in elections) and damage against an apprentice is not considered a High Crime against the apprentice.
Augustus would suggest that Regulus takes more time to think about the implications before proposing such a clause. Maybe just start with a general intention to treat apprentices with respect and benevolence?
I like where the discussion is going.
To be clear: Regulus proposal was admittedly pushing it too far. That was intentional. He would rather make one big "complete" change than make several small incomplete ones. Also, some of these only make sense as a group.
By the same token that Thebes is not a covenant, a covenant is not a Tribunal. It is easier to achieve common grounds between members of the covenant. Any burden can surely be shared, and there are mechanisms to ensure both that magi cannot abuse the system by depriving others from having apprentices and that apprentices cannot abuse their rights. The merits of each of these mechanisms can be discussed on a case by case analysis, but of course, in the last instance they would be judged by Tribunal, not covenant, in the same way that any (supposedly) breach of the code is discussed at Tribunal when things go wrong.
1.1. Good fits: one single master finding an apprentice and claiming him isn't conductive to a good fit either. A system that formalizes that the finder has no particular right over a Gifted child increases the chances of a good fit, even if only a little. Also, no magi has rights over a Gifted until he opens the arts of the child, and there are several cases of such nature in the Tribunal.
Vis to apprentice: if he is to be a half-magus, he should have a half quota. That's just direct application of logic. Regulus doesn't really agrees with the merit of the proposal (he knows vis in the apprentice hands can be dangerous), but with it's logic. It is as simple as that. But it could easily be converted to "and additional half-quota to the master, to be used in benefit of the apprentice". Anyway this vis is going to end in the hands of the master. "In the benefit of the apprentice" is highly debatable (a magi could argue that buying a summa for himself makes him a better master, and therefore, the apprentice receives benefits). In the end any contention point would be brought to Tribunal, just as is already done today in other disagreements between magi.
Vote at the Council: same thing, half-magus, half vote. The vote of one magus alone doesn't change much, either at council or Tribunal. It is the will of the majority who changes things. Provisions may be put that an apprentice right to vote is suspended in certain cases (e.g., changes to the Charter) under the assumption that he doesn't has enough experience to opinate. Also, Regulus is also assuming that this half-vote will end up being used in accordance to the master designs (just as the Tremere do).
Both half-vis and half-vote are actually small benefits to the master (if he doesn't abuse them and instead treats his apprentice as an equal), and will teach responsability.
Damage to be treated as High Crime: this is actually VERY hard to enforce at Tribunal, because disrespecting the Charter itself is a low crime. But Regulus wants grounds to try that, if the need arises. And a common understanding that damaging an apprentice is, for practical effects, the same as damaging another magus.
4.1. As of now there are no compensation clauses for damaging an apprentice because if we understand it as a High Crime the matter should be compensated as a High Crime (not all high crimes lead to Wizards March, remember. There are other options, such as vis fines, compensation, etc).
General intention to treat apprentices well: this is already the common understanding; so much that mistreatment of the apprentice is treated as a low crime. Also, a general guideline shouldn't be in the Charter, since it is not actually enforceable.
As for Eikona's concerns:
We can surely come up with a way for magi to show higher interest in apprentices, which could tip the balance in the choosing; but evaluating Gentle Gifted children higher is just you imposing Jerbiton values upon the whole order.
1.1. The law should refrain to benefit the finder too much, the children are not cattle to be paid for; but a proper reward can be discussed. Regulus just doesn't want to incentive people to treat apprentices as objects to me bartered.
1.2 Agreed on mothers and fathers rights, as long as they uphold the apprentice's rights. Any disagreement if both mother and father are magi should be solved by Tribunal.
Competent magi to train: Regulus is not concerned because treating damage to apprentices as High Crime would mean an incomplete opening of the Arts becomes High Crime instead of Low Crime, but sure, we can have that clause in the Charter. He notes, however, that this shouldn't stop a magus from presenting himself as a master, only from opening the arts while not competent.
Comment already addressed: half-magus, half-quota (potentially to be used by the master in benefit of the apprentice). But this is going to be a point of contention and can/should be further discussed.
Our Charter cannot go against the Oath, but also has no binding power outside our covenant. An apprentice of ours claimed by a Bonisagus from another covenant shall abide by that covenant's Charter. However, by the current reading of the clause, the Bonisagus must compensate the covenant with a season of service (if this is legally enforceable is another thing). An apprentice from another covenant claimed by a Bonisagus from our covenant would have half-member rights while he is an apprentice.
Regulus is aware of the difficulties and implications. He understands that his sodales complaints are valid, and well-meaned even. His proposed system can still improve, by much. But if this is to have any potential for large scale impact in the order a "general agreement that apprentices should be well treated" isn't enough. If agreement for these additions to the Charter can't be reached in reasonable time (say, whatever the magi could discuss in about 1 hour?) he will try again after better understanding his sodales. He doesn't want to sour the relations with the others, and changing a Tribunal is a long game. He wants the covenant as an ally, not an enemy, and he is very open about this.
Wolfgang is very receptive to the idea of protecting apprentices, but lets the others debate the finer points.
He does point out that general statements - like "Apprentices shall be treated fairly and with benevolence" allow for more flexibility in enforcement. A peripheral code can add that statement to the definition of training in "I will train apprentices..." And if that is combined with a ruling that apprentices aren't magical power, that will make a big difference. In his opinion, granular rules create loopholes, broad rules influence behavior because the spirit of the rule remains more important than specifics.
Marcus would have started sounding enthused with apprentices rights, but got more and more reserved as the radical proposals went on. Specifically:
apprentices choosing masters is fine by him, though he worries why anyone would choose a Tyrus master, given their harsh treatment.
the payment for a gifted child is far too low for the effort of finding one
Vis and votes for apprentices is a hard line for him. Perengators dont get either and they are full magi. Vis and votes are for someone who has willingly sworn to the covenant. An apprentice is paid in the opportunity to learn, just as in any trade!
apprentices complaining is one thing, but any trade needs some hardship to learn. Marcus thinks over coddling apprentices will weaken them (CF believing adversity makes people stronger)
abusing apprentices is already a crime, why not just push to make it harsher ore prosecuted more he naively asks.
he is 100% behind harsh harsh sanctions for people who damage, kill or harm apprentices.
Alright, I see I'll need to tone down the motion a lot. =9
I think if I could hear from Houlio (as the one who is playing a Tytalus) before writing anything it would be better.
But anyway Regulus next motion is going to be more in the line of "we shouldn't hurt apprentices, and if we do we are to compensate them" (instead of what happens currently, in which the fine is usually divided between Tribunal and prosecution, and the apprentice doesn't necessarily receives anything).
That will be strongly supported by Marcus.