Initiation into Verditius mysteries

Exactly, "Outer Mystery" is always singular and every use can be clearly taken as Verditius Magic. Even in the confraternities it can be read as "only Verditius magi can be follow the path."

That is my reading, that you need to know verdidias magic first. I don't think it is contradictory, just not as clear as it could be. For example it stresses that you can learn the minor mysteries in any order, but then after mentioning the level of Mystery lore needed for greater mysteries mentions nothing about order. This leave major mysteries somewhat ambiguous, especially as each confraturnity has only one major mystery and each major mystery is held by only one confraturnity.

Yay! I've had a chance to sit down with the book when writing this response (most had to be written away from the book). Here's everything I can find that is relevant to the two issues. First, I'll state two summaries.

  1. On the unique Inner Mystery issue, there are two sets of corrections that will make things work how I think we all want them to work. (Remember, my only point here was in support of Ponderingturtle's ambiguity comment - that there are contradictions. I even caught another contradiction on a different issue.)

a) The two counts of four Inner Mysteries are incorrect; there are nine Inner Mysteries. The confraternity paths are incorrect; drop the Outer Mystery comment from each of them. Change the "regulated only by" comment on page 118 to apply to only the four Minor Inner Mysteries that are not unique to the confraternities instead of all Minor Inner Mysteries. Once those changes are made we should no longer have contradictions.

b) Change the statements of a singular Outer Mystery so Verditius Magic is just the Outer Mystery common to the whole House, but not the only Outer Mystery. Change the line about unique Inner Mysteries to unique Outer Mysteries. Change the paths, moving "then" to after the comma after the first virtue listed. For example, "Initiates learn the Outer Mystery, Minor Magical Focus (Swords), then Reforging, ..." Once those changes are made we should no longer have contradictions.

  1. The Major Inner Mysteries are not necessarily available when Verditius magi want them. The Minor ones are, but not necessarily the Major ones. You might have to acquire them through a confraternity; you might not. You might have to do other things; you might not. There are only two guarantees: you need Verditius Cult Lore 5 and you can get them through certain confraternities. For example, Bind Curse is probably not known outside of the Confraternity of Himinis the Mad, but it could be.


  1. So there can be any sequence for both Minor Inner Mysteries and Major Inner Mysteries. However, this says nothing about any other requirements for those Mysteries.
  2. There are four Minor Inner Mysteries and four Major Inner Mysteries. Once we take into account Enchant Casting Tools, Items of Quality, Reforging Enchanted Items, Verditius Elder Runes (Just why isn't that Major? A question for another time.), Automata, Bind Curse, Bind Magical Creatures, and Item Attunement, there are no other Inner Mysteries.
  1. This is but one instance, but repeatedly the singular is used, so there is only one Outer Mystery.
  2. Interestingly, the Verditius Cult Lore score statement contradicts the rules for Mystery Initiation (TMRE). Though page 4 addresses this for the four Houses, the above quote (even when combined with the insert on page 119) still contradicts the statement on page 4 because page 4 is restricted to those who entered via apprenticeship. Though this isn't the specific issue, it does add to the ambiguity of the chapter.
  1. As long as a Verditius is Initiating others, they are doing what is expected. This could be handled by Initiating others in a confraternity just as well as outside of a confraternity. That means Inner Mysteries could remain within a confraternity without a problem here.
  1. There is a requirement of Verditius Cult Lore 3 to be Initiated into the Minor Inner Mysteries.
  2. Outside of doing the Initiations (which tend to bring about Hubris mentioned above), there are no further restrictions on acquiring the Minor Inner Mysteries.
  3. There is a requirement of Verditius Cult Lore 5 to be Initiated into the Major Inner Mysteries.
  4. There is no stipulation that there are no other restrictions. That statement is only for the Minor Inner Mysteries. So there may well be other restrictions.
  1. There is a set order of initiations if you join a confraternity.
  2. The confraternities are part of the Mystery Cult that is House Veriditius. It may seem silly to point this out, but it is logically important. Members of a subset are members of the set.
  1. Since they're part of the House Verditius Mystery Cult, and there are only eight Inner Mysteries in that Mystery Cult, four of those are unique to the four mentioned confraternities. The other four are not unique.
  2. If these are Minor Inner Mysteries, then they are open to the whole of House Verditius since requiring confraternity membership would be an extra requirement on a Minor Inner Mystery. But that would mean they're not unique to the confraternity. Thus they must be Major Inner Mysteries.
  3. None of those eight Inner Mysteries really mirror common Hermetic Virtues. That means "Inner" is incorrect here, the comment about mirroring is incorrect here, or the count of four Minor and four Major Inner Mysteries above is incorrect.

(I now realize I misread this, absentmindedly glossing over one contradiction and only seeing another. Sorry about that. There are two possible contradictions. Take your pick. I've corrected my earlier mistake below. It doesn't get rid of the contradictions so much as make them different and potentially smaller.)

  1. One option is that the statement of sequence is incorrect. Since you could follow the Outer Mystery with any of the Inner ones before joining, thus breaking the order in the path. So either the path order is incorrect or the other comments about freely choosing the order are incorrect. Dropping the statement about the Outer Mystery solves this contradiction.
  2. The other option is that each sub-cult has its own Outer Mystery, which would be what? This contradicts the singular Outer Mystery of House Verditius but leaves these sections intact.
  3. There is one partial exception to these. In the case of the Confraternity of Irene the Younger the path is intact because there are two, meaning one may be an Outer Mystery and the other an Inner Mystery. But then which is which? And we still have the singular Outer Mystery issue.
  1. Minor Magical Focus (Swords), Affinity with Ignem, Puissant Imaginem/Mentem, and Minor Magical Focus (Wooden Wands) are not Inner Mysteries because they're not among the eight that exist.
  2. Minor Magical Focus (Swords), Affinity with Ignem, Puissant Imaginem/Mentem, and Minor Magical Focus (Wooden Wands) are Inner Mysteries because they on the paths.
  3. Minor Magical Focus (Swords), Affinity with Ignem, Puissant Imaginem/Mentem, and Minor Magical Focus (Wooden Wands) are not Outer Mysteries because they're not the singular Outer Mystery.
  4. Verditius Elder Runes and Item Attunement are not unique, so those must not be the unique ones.
  5. Only Reforging, Items of Quality, Enchanted Casting Tools, Bind Magical Creatures, Automata, and Bind Curse actually qualify as both Inner Mysteries and unique. If we rule out the Minor Inner Mysteries because they can't have such a restriction (see above), that leaves Bind Magical Creatures, Automata, and Bind Curse as eligible. But then the Confraternity of Balento is left with no unique Inner Mystery, so even obeying all previous statements here leaves a contradiction.
  1. The Confraternity of Himinis the Mad is how Bind Curse has been passed on. This works well with #5 just above, but #5 has internal issues anyway. Still, it seems Bind Curse is probably limited to that confraternity.
  1. This is a restatement from earlier and carries the same meanings and contradictions with it.

Looks like there were replies while I was writing offline. Anyway, hope everything's addressed and clear now.


"Most pick and choose the Inner House Mysteries they want, disregarding those that do not suit their private goals" makes it pretty clear they are not "held by only one confraternity". (p 121)

As for the Learning the Inner Mysteries (p 118), I read this as: there are no restrictions on the House’s Minor Inner Mysteries, but Major ones require a Verditius Cult Lore score of 5. So you could get Cult Lore 5, then do all the Major ones, then do the Minor ones.

I haven't seen any sentence fragment that goes against this interpretation, in fact many support it. Did I miss anything?


You've cleared up some of your problems. You still don't understand the options that a Verditus has.

Think of it this way: Either everyone else on this board is wrong, or you are. It seems to me that we've all had some experience playing or SGing Verditus players, and have spent significant time reading up on the rules.

So, you can take our word for it, or spend more time fussing over the book. Either way, this is what you'll end up with.

1 Outer Mystery: Verditus

4 Unique Confraternity Mysteries: Focus - swords; Focus - Wooden Wands; Puissant Imaginem/Mentem; Affinity Ignem, each forcing the characters to select only specifics from the universal mysteries.

4 Minor Inner Mysteries (Universally accessible at Verd. Lore 3): Casting Tools; Runes; Reforging; IofQ

4 Majors: (Universally accessible at Verd. Lore 5): Bind Critters; Attunement; Automata; Curses.

It really, truly is that simple.

Oh, and as it happens, here's something else to consider: Its an RPG. The only real limits are your imagination and the say-so of other players and SG. You can always invent your own confraternity for the sake of your saga, to fit the story you want. Heck, if you really want to flaunt things, you can even add in entirely different virtues altogether.

One I've been toying with: Confraternity of Wayland. Continues some hidden traditions of Northern mage-smiths, a secret confraternity. Initiates: Foci; Elder Runes; Enchant Casting Tools; Craft Magic; Item Attunement. Carries extra flaws of Cabal Legacy and Weak Spontaneous. Powerful enchanters, but perhaps exist bridged with Ex-Miscellania, potentially facing anhilation from Verditus if their cross-house legacy were ever discovered.

You seem way overconcerned with following the book-stories to the letter. Loosen up and be creative.

While I certainly have an opinion on the rules, (and have a Verditius that I play) I would make a suggestion (Gently)

  1. Cease. You can go back and forth for the next three versions and never convince each other.

  2. The player can take it to his SG. Let his SG do his job.

  3. Ask the writers (VERY NICELY!). They do read these posts, and some of them would certainly enlighten you for a few pawns of Vis....


I showed you very clearly above. Tell me what's wrong.

Interestingly, if you read the chapter in page order, the interpretation that remains valid the longest (all the way until the first list of specific confraternity Mysteries) is not the one we all are using. It's that the unique Inner Mysteries are Major Inner Mysteries. Our interpretation fails to follow the rules prior to that. So if you're reading carefully in page order, that the unique Inner Mysteries are Major Inner Mysteries should be the interpretation that lasts the longest. Of course, eventually they all fall apart because of contradictions.

There is no validity to this. You must make a conscious choice to interpret things this way and ignore certain statements (to get around the contradictions), or you must make a logical error to arrive at these conclusions. I'm making a conscious choice, aware of the contradictions. Which are you doing?

For clarity, that's 5, not 4.

This is the one point that is has no internal contradiction I could find, and it disagrees with your statement. 4 Majors requiring Verd. Lore 5 that are not necessarily universally accessible is what's written. You can play with them universally accessible without disagreeing with the rules, but the rules do not state that they are universally accessible.

You're the one who said it's clear and simple. I'm the one who said it's not. Now you're saying it's clear as long as I don't pay close attention. That would mean it's not clear, which was the whole point.

Why is it the point? On my first reading I came to a totally different conclusion, one that is just as valid as the one we all share (I chose to interpret it differently on a later reading.) and one that should be the one reached first if you read the section in page order. That there is no one valid interpretation should be understood when responding to questions about the accessibility.


Based on the consensus on the contradictions:

  1. Minor Inner Mysteries also have a Cult Lore requirement.
  2. Specially noted Minor Inner Mysteries of the confraternities are restricted to confraternity members.

And not needing a consensus to bypass a contradiction:
3) Major Inner Mysteries may have other requirements.

Otherwise, yes.


One section makes a point that minor inner mysteries are broadly available, and another makes the point that inner mysteries are broadly available.

Possibly, but one example of the initiation script for a major virtue has teaching a minor virtue as a part of it, so you would need to know a minor virtue if you wanted to use that initiation script. So it might be impractical to do so for reasons of established initiation scripts and tricky for social reasons but not wrong mechanically.

Popular fiction books are broadly available. Audubon's Birds of America originals are books. Since popular fiction books are broadly available, that implies books are broadly available. Does that then imply Birds of America originals are broadly available? I would love that, but no.


Except that is not quite what we have here, we have one qualified statement that inner mysteries are widely available and one unqualified statement that inner mysteries are widely available. So you have to assume that the second statement is wrong and only the first statement it right, while if you assume the second statement is right the first statement is also right.


I'm going to respectfully agree with the previous post. If this is still giving you trouble, you should contact the writers and ask for their help.

if this:

doesn't seem clear to you that the Inner Mysteries are not unique, and if this:

doesn't clear things up, especially following:

Then there's really no help for you. Until you become more comfortable with an admittedly complex system, you might want to stick to a more vanilla character build, like a School of the Founder Flambeau.

From simply reading the section on Confraternities, we learn that each confraternity has a, as in "a," an article denoting a single or solitary, unique inner mystery.

Most Verditus choose whichever inner mysteries they want. We learn earlier that there are a bunch of these. Each Confraternity has explicitly only one unique mystery. It is spelled out so many times its mind boggling. Besides the part where the book outright says, "each... has a unique inner mystery" you should notice that each Confraternity blurb has a heading "Initiation Mystery," distinctly seperate from the Mystery Path, which describes other mysteries that are not unique to Confraternities.

There are 4 Confraternities. They have memberships capped in the book at 4-8. That's a maximum of 32 Confraternity members, with a more reasonable expectation of 24, all in. There are 72 members of House Verditus.

You might also wonder why Confraternities of Balento and Himnis have different initiations for Bind Magical Creatures and Bind Curses than are given in the general section.

Besides the explicit rules instructions about how these Mysteries work, there's a mountain of evidence that shows just how illogical it is to think that the General Inner Mysteries are restricted to Confraternities.

Do you honestly think the authors set up this house so that most inner mysteries, such as Bind Magical Curses or Automata or Enchant Casting tools, would only be known by 4 people in the entire house?

Finally, you keep referencing some piece of the puzzle I've not read. I'm still waiting for you to actually say what that is. You seem to be caught up on the notion that, despite them saying explicitly "here are the Mysteries, most will pick and choose as they please," you think this might not exclude some hidden restriction later on.

Yes, it is what we have here. Minor Inner Mysteries are broadly available. Minor Inner Mysteries are Inner Mysteries. That implies Inner Mysteries are broadly available regardless of whether or not Major Inner Mysteries are broadly available. So the second statement is a logical conclusion of the first statement and implies nothing about Major Inner Mysteries.


Depends on if you view the statement to be inclusive or not. For example are all minor inner mysteries available or just one or two, you could have just one or two broadly available and still be able to say non inclusively that inner mysteries are broadly available. I take it to be intended as an inclusive statement, as it lacks the qualifier that only some inner mysteries are broadly available.

N = number in a set (available number of scripts for all Inner Mysteries)
n1 = number in a given subset (available number of scripts for Minor Inner Mysteries)
n2 = number in the set that are not in the subset (available number of scripts for Major Inner Mysteries)
X = target number at which we declare there are a lot (the number of available scripts to be considered widely available)

Given n1 <= N. (subset) Given n1 >= X, and given N >= X. (These are the two statements, that Minor Inner Mysteries are widely available and that Inner Mysteries are widely available.) Find n2.

N = n1 + n2
n2 = N - n1
n2 >= 0

So those two statements together say absolutely nothing about the availability of Major Inner Mysteries. Had the second statement had a comment such as "all Inner Mysteries" being widely available or "both Minor and Major Inner Mysteries" being widely available, that would change things. Without such a statement, any conclusion about the availability of Major Inner Mysteries drawn from those two statements is incorrect.


Fine. Can you quote anything that displays this ambiguity? Actual citations with possible interpretations.

I did pretty thoroughly. Look a few posts above.


Not enough. Page number, quote, how you read it, and what supports that reading.