Anyway,letting you guys know I have a heavy work weekend starting this evening. I am usually unavailable all weekend, but my schedual stretches to Monday and thus I won't be able to post until Tuesday.
This is the life of a cook...
Tonight (Friday); 5pm until 6am at Excalibur
Tomorrow (Saturday); 11am to 4pm at Lionhead, then back to Excalibur from 5pm until 7am
The next day (Sunday); 11am until 5pm at Lionhead
The day after (Monday); 3pm until 11pm at Lionhead
It is all part of the same company (Ala Carte), so hopefully I will score some OT cash. Not this week, but next week (Monday counts as next week on the timeclock)
It will be like this all football season long (presuming it doesn't kill me)
Wouldn't this be an Oath of Fealty, and thus wouldn't swearing it be a major Code violation? I don't see how the covenant Charter could have ever been ratified by any Quaesitor, if the Oath is charter mandated. Can someone better with Lex Hermeticum help me wrap my head around this?
The restriction on Oaths of Fealty is rather specifically in regards to Mundanes. That it is beneath the dignity of a Magus to serve a Mundane and that doing so unrestrictedly is mundane interference.
Joining a covenant however has been likened to an Oath of Fealty on many occasions. The difference is that it is an agreement between Magi.
There is also a canon magical lineage within Merenita in 5th ed. that regularly swear themselves to -Faerie- Nobles and serve as their court magi. This also is not something against the code in and of itself.
So, again, the restriction is only legally something barred in interactions with mundanes.
Hey guys,
I got called into work yesterday (because I have made myself the "go-to" guy), and it was some late hours. I don't have much time at the library today, but I am doing my copy/paste routine so I can work on material at home latter. Just hang in there with me
Also a reminder that the Order's "laws" aren't exactly ironclad and unassailable. It's based on a vote and as is all crimes, you need to be caught. Wizards with all the power at their disposal are far more tools to conceal their involvement than mundanes.
As for that group of magi serving faerie nobles, they would not necessarily get charged with having sworn an oath of fealty. But lo when their politics in faerie courts has repercussions on other magi.
Marko you have suggested that it is a requirement for a Magi to have trained an Apprentice before they can become an Archmage. As it has been pointed out, this is not a requirement as listed on page 24 of GotF
If Antonio feels that Titus does not meet the requirement to become an Archmage, that's fine, it's his right. However until the rules previously established are changed with a visible House Rule, then they should stand. If changes have been made to to deviate from RAW in any way they need to be listed as House Rules, period. Since it is not when I posted I was under the assumption that Titus had met the requirements ( At least in his mind, there can be some debate there ). Due to this, I'm calling a Vote. Since this is Troupe Play, I'll be willing to accept the changes to RAW if, as a group there is a consensus that in order to become an Archmage, you must indeed train an apprentice.
I vote no.
I feel that as it stands in GotF is fine. Requiring a Magi to train an apprentice seems silly, it would be like requiring a Magi to have a Familiar or a Talisman. Some Magi chose to create / get / train one, others don't. This should have absolutely no bearing on if you become an Archmage. You had mentioned a legacy earlier Marko? Like I said, killing a bunch of people, making some amazing items, having a major breakthrough all are great examples of a Legacy. One does not need to train an Apprentice to leave a Legacy... Becoming an Archmage is not about apprentices, or having 5s in all of your arts. It is about your Magical Power, pure and simple. Titus has that in spades...
So as it stands we have the following votes in Favor of changing the rules as listed on Page 24 of GotF to reflect the requirement of having trained an Apprentice.
No - GIJoo
No - Vortigern
No - Arawn
Yes? - Octavian ( Assuming from the way your posts are written )
Others have posted but havent directly voted, so...
I am always one in favor of specific definition of things and a well maintained House Rule section. I, personally, don't think changing the rules is necessary. ( Vote: No. ) Either way however I think the OOC disagreement there should be cleared up and the scene ret-conned to be roleplaying over again with a clear OOC understanding, rather than have this constant back and forth between OOC and IC.
I'm also in favor of perhaps getting a full charter and the like hammered out. I'd be willing to do the lions share of the work here, if necessary, without any promises as to a timeline. As I said. I prefer specific definition etc etc. I do not like sitting here and debating back and forth what 'reasonable' 'by-laws' might be in the game. If we want a charter, lets write one, and then write by-laws, and rulings/cases... and whatever the heck else we want to have built into it and in the covenant history. It will be long, baroque, over-complicated, a headache to quote from and reference, and otherwise just completely and delightfully hermetic. I promise.
I'm getting ready to head to the sand for a year ( though I 'should' have internet where I am going. ) so in the interim I am both busier than normal and the wife is being demanding of my free time. When I get settled in where I am going I 'should' have more free time to spend on game-stuff.
Archmages have the right to accept only 1 challenge per year. If Antonio has multiple challengers, he can decide by what criteria he accepts whomever he faces. If he chooses to whittle down the list by saying you must have trained an apprentice, that's a fine measure of progression of power of a magus as that requires that the candidate have at least 5 in every art score.
Source? If that was the case, then I would understand. However it is my understanding that Antonio has not been challenged at all, let alone by another Magi this year. Again I'm curious where you found the only one a year ruling as I don't see it anywhere in GotF. However that is not the point. We are talking about a flat our requirement, period, that before you can even be considered, you must have an apprentice.
Edit: And by no means is having a 5 in all the arts a good "measure of power". Specialists are the ones who actually do all the 'cool stuff' and with the exception of Spont Monkeys / Certamen Specialist there is very little reason to diversify like that. Heck you don't need 5s to train an apprentice, you could just have someone else open their arts.
I'm with you on both counts. Titus would not have acted the way he did, had he known that he needed an apprentice. Hell, he would have started training one a LONG time ago. But yes, I'd say that once this is decided, some ret-con is in order. As for the Charter, yes, it needs to get hammered out. I'd be happy to do a bit of the work...
I've already given my stance on the matter. Outside of the Rhine Tribunal, there's no real requirement of having trained an Apprentice in order to progress beyond the rank of "Master". Actually, that rank doesn't exist per se outside of the Rhine. Individual Covenants may use the distinction, but the Order as a whole does not.
Personally, I think that Titus' specialisation is extreme (I've always advocated possessing a broad range of ability). He is very, very good in a narrow field. Perhaps among the best in the Order. Phillipus Niger is better, of course, but he's much, much older.
Actually, Titus could probably challenge Phillipus Niger for the title of Archmage. They're both Apromor lineage, and one can be certain that the challenge would be to Titus' liking. Since he's not linked to him directly, there wouldn't be any charge of "nepotism". It's just an alertnative.
(Sorry, just realized I hadn't been reading this topic for a couple of months.)
OK, that just makes the plot hook too good to pass up....At the beginning of 1225, Viola will put out word that she's looking for a new apprentice, though she expects the search will take some time.
Page 45 of Wizard's Grimoire 4th edition book, where they explain the archmage title and the terms of challenge. Personally, I find the whole "I'll get someone else to open the apprentice's arts for me" is a big cop out and at the very least reflects poorly on the parens of the apprentice since it just means he's inept and needs to beg from others, more competent. And then you face the risk of how Marie "stole" Ludovico's apprentice. then again, I'm not a huge fan of the penetration rules in 5th edition but I'm not going to get into that discussion again.
I'm just generally not a fan of genericus generalist types. I feel like you end up with a much more interesting character with a specialist who can acheive larger, more themed/narrowly aligned, effects. I also, as I've stated in the public thread, am not a fan of the broadness of the requirement to open the arts of an apprentice. However both of those are really a totally different discussion in and of themselves. ( Oh, and by the by, no one has bothered to inform 'me' if Ruth was absconded with or something? ) There really are only two reasons to go the 'generalist' route and those are spont. magic and certamen mastery... and those are very specific design/build choices. If you are doing much of anything else, you have very little reason to be so unfocused/scattered in your build.
To elaborate on my comments in the general thread, a lineage of a given style of magi ( to use my previous example of Dacian Necromancers say ) are not, logically speaking, generalists either. Hermetic Magic may have 'synergised' the understanding of a lot of magic and given magi of various traditions/lineages the 'option' of studying a much broader range of things and integrating them into their praxis, however... to assume that they all basically 'have' to, or that such a scattershot/mismash of things is the 'norm' is... really really not what I think is realistic. i.e. the old magical traditions still exist, are still practiced, in the order... with hermetic magic. The 'themed' styles of different lineages is what makes magi interesting. To me that means 'specialist' style characters that are built according to said themes/predispositions of their lineage.
The matter is not up for debate and no vote shall change my mind.
No Archamgus of the Order will accept a challenge from anyone who has not yet trained an apprentice.
I have said time and time again, though this saga is harcore for using ArM5 rules, it indeed relies upon the history and culture presented in older editions.
This is not a rules issue, it is a culture/history issue.
Thus, I will cite Vare's favorite book
You can debate, scream, and cry all you want. That's just the way it is.
