How does the Aegis work

important not to exclude Ex Misc magi who have not had arts opened.

This also affects Hermetic effects such as Parma Magica, Longevity Rituals, Familiar Bonds, and Talisman bonds. However, the Aegis must Penetrate the magus's Magic Resistance to cancel these effects.

This is pretty dramatic (as have commented @callen, @InfinityzeN and @Tellus) . Entirely dispelling them seems too strong. Or is the idea to suppress their effects while within the Aegis? Because I like the second one. It would mean that an old mage would not want to risk their LR being inactive for long vs needing to waste a season and 15+ vis

I should say that I am still in the camp of the Aegis should bypass parma entirely, which is a different issue.

I think that this is an elegant solution, and I like it.

1 Like

This seems new. The idea that it dispels or suppresses any of those seems counter to certain (I believe) published material where only certain VIPs and trusted friends are granted token when they arrive for a tribunal at the covenant.

1 Like

This is definitely new, I would say contradictory to the game as played in the past, and some have indicated a deal breaker to them paying a game. Also how does the idea that you dispel Parma Magica if you defeat the wizards magic resistance even work?
Myself I would say that effects cast upon a target before it enters the aegis are not dispelled by entering- yes this means someone can enter the aegis while invisible. On the other hand it seems to me pretty odd to have a tribunal ruling that it is illegal to do so if it is not possible to do so. You have gotten a lot of feedback which has been very consistent that this section is a problem, but you seem determined to find a way to wedge it into the game over the protests of the players.

1 Like

I don’t think David was saying this is how it must be but that this is how he sees that it currently is. I think he is trying to figure out what needs to be exceptions because there is a disconnect between how he (and one other person far as I can tell) has seen it working up to now and how many of us have seen it working.

There is a whole school of combat in House Flambeau based on dispelling or suppressing Parma and and other sources of MR and in order for it to work it must beat both the level and have penetration to get through the MR so that piece doesn’t necessarily seem odd to me except in that it’s not how I have understood the Aegis to work.

1 Like

I am currently very busy, and go at it perhaps tomorrow. Just one quick thing:

I was quite sure, that the Aegis did not affect a Parma Magica. Also because of:

1 Like

I did say seem- the fact is this bit has in previous discussion already had an overwhelmingly negative response indicating that it was seen as a major departure from how things have been. It should have been obvious it would get the same reaction a second time. Instead he wallpapered over it with a revision to the aegis which was questionable when it first came out in a published supplement without widespread player feedback regarding the aegis needing to penetrate.

I have to admit that I've always (since some point in the 90s) seen the Aegis as suppressing effects within it, not as dispelling them. It is ReVi and not PeVi after all.

1 Like

I think I prefer the earlier write-up that required being a magi or being acknowledged by a magi.

My reading is it still requires taking part in a ritual act, not just being at the covenant. Some covenants the magi may restrict the ceremony to themselves but it means they can include Order members who are non-hermetics, trusted servants with supernatural abilities, and gives a nice way for a possessing demon to infiltrate. Many covenfolk may just think it’s a sort of useless ritual that the magi do but folks with supernatural abilities will likely notice it is more difficult to use those abilities and might take part if they aren’t too worried about joining what is definitely a non-[insert their religion] ceremony. But I don’t really see this as a change from the “taking part in the ritual” bit as written in Core.

I agree with that assessment.

Perhaps surprisingly, those are the only two deviations from what my troupe and I had always believed were the rules as intended.

As for Supernatural effects that have neither casting totals nor Penetration, we read on HMRE p.7, and I think this is fairly uncontroversial:

If a hedge wizard casts an effect towards an Aegis, the effect must Penetrate the Aegis to be successful. This includes transportation effects; for example, a folk witch cannot fly through an Aegis unless her Penetration Total exceeds the level of the Aegis."

Now, a supernatural effect without Penetration, as far as I understand it, does not penetrate even MR 0. If the rules are intended to be different, then probably a clarification should be extended to the section on Magic Resistance, since in ArM5 (p.85, the last paragraph on Magic Resistance) we read:

If the target of a spell has Magic Resistance of 0, she is only affected if the penetration total is 1 or greater. Thus, Magic Resistance 0 is substantially better than no magic resistance.

If there is no penetration total, there is no penetration total 1 or greater, and thus the effect does not penetrate. And thus the effect fizzles out in an Aegis of any Level. For example, a lesser purifying touch should not be able to penetrate MR by the rules as written and as intended, fizzling out in an Aegis of any Level.

As for Nightwalkers: I think they were never intended to be an exception to the "standard" rules, though the author might have misread those rules (or failed to read the general text for Hedge Wizards on HMRE p.7). There is no mention of straying in relationship with the Aegis or MR anywhere in the mechanics section of the Nightwalkers chapter, strongly suggesting that the author did not intend to change anything. It's only in Saga seeds that we read (HMRE p.118):

Nightwalkers have no Might, so they are not held at bay by the Aegis of the Hearth

Now, this is technically true. A Nightwalker is not held at bay by the Aegis of the Hearth, and can simply walk into one. But as I read it, a straying Nightwalker is blocked by Magic Resistance, and the straying effect fizzles out upon entering the Aegis. I cannot find any text in the Nightwalker section that is technically incorrect if Nightwalker powers cannot penetrate MR or the Aegis.

I thought he was saying things like Unaging: if you have the Virtue Unaging, it doesn't cease to function in the AotH. But the statement is blanket enough or vague enough that it could encompass too much.

Lets look at the rest of that quote shall we?

Nightwalkers have no Might, so
they are not held at bay by the Aegis of the
Hearth. They can walk straight through the
walls that most covenants use to defend their
supplies, and nightwalkers can choose to be
invisible. They are able to obtain information,
steal small objects, and perform sabotage
with a simplicity that is breathtaking.

How are a nightwalker supposed to be able to be able do all the actions described if they don't use straying to do so?

A nightwalker can enter an Aegis by walking like any mundane.

In the absence of an Aegis, he can walk, or rather have his phantasticum walk, through walls defending supplies (possibly invisibly). Note that nothing says that those walls are protected by an Aegis, though the fact they are "used by a covenant" might suggest so.

It's important to note that this section is not part of the "mechanics sections" of Nightwalkers. It's part of the Saga Seeds. If the author had assumed that Nightwalker rules were to be an exception to the standard Aegis rules, he would have written so when describing the mechanics (e.g. note that Nightwalker straying and other powers are unaffected by the Aegis of the Hearth).

Last but not least: David Chart asked to each of us how we think that the clarified rules he wrote, (which are the rules ... as intended by him) deviated from what we thought were the rules as intended. That's just how I see it :slight_smile:

One can read it that way, but it would be a very convoluted reading.
I think it is obvious that section in HMRE talks about straying Nightwalkers when saying they can enter an Aegis, not someone walking like any mundane.

Besides, why would a straying nightwalker be stopped by an Aegis?
Their spirit can, as already noted, enter the Aegis just fine when residing in the body, so why wouldn't it be able to do that when away from the body?
No Might means that aspect of the Aegis won't stop them.
There is no indication that you can dispel a straying with some kind of spell.
I see nothing in the description of Nightwalkers that suggest they are stopped by Magic Resistance - on the contrary they sometimes fight minor demons or ghosts or other creatures with Might, and they wouldn't be able to do that if they had to penetrate the MR of those, since a nightwalker typically has no Penetration.

I think, regardless, much like Persona, the Nightwalkers line probably isn't required in the base book definition of the Aegis since the Nightwalkers aren't defined in the base book. If necessary, it can go with the description of the Nightwalkers.

It might be obvious to you. It is not to me.
More generally, I may not have been clear.
What I am saying is

  1. I believe that the general rule on supernatural effects created or maintaned by Hedge wizards, by HMRE, is intended to make them fizzle out in an hostile Aegis unless they have (sufficient) Penetration.
  2. I believe that Nightwalkers were never meant to be a specific exception to the "standard" rules, though the author may have misread those rules.
  3. Objectively there is nothing in the paragraph that is technically incorrect if you assume that Nightwalker straying is blocked (in the absence of an improbably high Penetration score) by MR and Aegis, as per 1 and 2.

Besides, why would a straying nightwalker be stopped by an Aegis?
Their spirit can, as already noted, enter the Aegis just fine when residing in the body, so why wouldn't it be able to do that when away from the body?

For the same reason why a flying witch is stopped (or rather, here flight power fizzles), even though in principle a giant could hurl her bodily through an Aegis. Straying - keeping the phantasticum separate from the body - is a supernatural power. Thus it fizzles in any hostile Aegis unless the Nightwalker has sufficient penetration (highly improbable, but theoretically possible).

I see nothing in the description of Nightwalkers that suggest they are stopped by Magic Resistance - on the contrary they sometimes fight minor demons or ghosts or other creatures with Might, and they wouldn't be able to do that if they had to penetrate the MR of those, since a nightwalker typically has no Penetration.

The lack of any rule regarding MR should be read as meaning that they default to "standard" rules for supernatural effects without penetration. Also, note that Nightwalkers sometimes fight creatures that have Might, but they sometimes also fight with weapons.

I don't agree. Separating the phantasticum from the body, that requires a supernatural power. Once separated they remain separated until the phantasticum returns to the body - there is no supernatural power keeping them apart.
This is similar to Bjornaer and their Heartbeast - changing shape is a supernatural action, staying in either shape is not.

I think David included rules from all books when he wrote out his "In my opinion, these are the Aegis RAI" post. Since the post is not a proposed errata or even close to final text there is no need to argue what should be in core and what should be in other books. Right now we just need to point out areas we find unclear and areas we feel are a change.

Once he has that information he will post a new version of what he feels are the RAI, or at least a clarifying post. At this point he might or might not ask for more input before the next step. That step being some form of proposed errata.

We are on step 2, with many more steps before we get to an actual proposed errata including at least one "If unclear, go back to step #". There is no need to start arguing over the wording now and it is counter productive. If we just stick to answering individually the two questions he asked it will give him less to work through for the next step.

2 Likes