I think you didn't find it. I doubt you would say that if you did. Let's see... it's on page 2, near the middle. Well, it's nearly half of page 2.
Chris
Found it, sorry.
Hey Chris,
What we`re really looking for is some citation suggesting a restriction on Major Inner Mysteries other than those explicitly stated.
I mean, the citations posted above, especially where the book says explicitly that each Confraternity has only one unique mystery seems to point in the exact opposite direction.
cheers,
J
Then you have misread what I have written repeatedly. Several of you have said the book says there are no restrictions other than Lore 5. I have have found no such statement under our interpretation (including the necessary edits to make our interpretation work). I've said there is no other statement of restrictions at all, whether there are restrictions or not, under our interpretation of confraternities (remember, we're all using the same interpretation for confraternities). That's why I've said having no other restrictions is consistent, but so is having other restrictions. I'm saying there is no other citation. You are the ones referencing something that you haven't cited. Where does it say there are no other restrictions? The effort has been made to specifically say that for the Minor Inner Mysteries. Why not have said it in general for Inner Mysteries or also specifically for Major Inner Mysteries? So it is not up to me to find a citation I say does not exist, it is up to you all to find the citation that you have claimed does exist.
You should notice that if you read things in page order the only interpretation that survives up until the listing of Mysteries within the first confraternity is that the unique Inner Mysteries are Major Inner Mysteries. The interpretation we all prefer falls to contradiction before that and so should have dropped from our minds earlier. But once you get to the first confraternity's listing of Mysteries, the remaining interpretation falls to contradiction, too. In the end they all do. So we must choose to interpret things by accepting that some of the statements must be incorrect. At that point, which ones you select to be incorrect determines which interpretation you want. Or, if you want to reverse-engineer it, which interpretation you want determines which ones you select to be incorrect. That's what I did above. I showed two ways of selecting things to be incorrect that both arrive at the interpretation we share. But I had to select things to be incorrect to arrive at our mutual interpretation. I think our interpretation is reasonable and is most likely the intended one. But it is not a logical one. In my case reading properly meant that prior to reading the first confraternity's Mystery listing my mind had already correctly determined that the unique Inner Mysteries would Major Inner Mysteries. But afterward there's just tons of confusion because even that interpretation fails. After rereading the chapter, I chose the interpretation we all share. Importantly though, I do recognize all the contradictions and that our interpretation is not a logical one because the chapter is ambiguous (my sole original point) due to the contradictions.
Chris
My point is you keep saying "accepting somethings but rejecting others..."
what others? I mean, I also can't prove that there's no tea cup orbiting the sun between Jupiter and Saturn. That doesn't prove there is one, though.
Your entire argument seems to be "You haven't shown me something that says there is no other restrictions than the ones listed, therefore I will assume that there is one."
And, as a matter of fact, we have pointed to exhaustive points that show, explicitly that there are no other restrictions than the 5 Verditus Lore.
What are the possible restrictions you've pointed to?
1.) Lore
2.) Confraternities.
The Confraternity section EXPLICITLY says that each Confraternity has A unique mystery. Note the singular. A. One. Uno. Une.
The Rest of the Chapter repeatedly and explicitly says Verditus magi choose the Mysteries that they see fit.
When in Ars Magica the authors want to limit who can and can't have certain powers, they do so very, very explicitly. Look at Bjornaer, with the clear lists of Clan initiations.
A couple of posts ago, I laid out a whole whack of quotes. There isn't a single, solitary one that even implies that any Major Mysteries are restricted to Confraternities.
Where it comes to undertanding how Confraternity Membership effects access to Mysteries, you've got it bass-ackwards.
Access to Mysteries are not restricted by Confraternity Membership. Quite the Opposite. Confraternity members are limited to what mysteries they can attain.
That's why membership, like all things in Ars Magica, is a trade-off. Cool free power, easy initiations, friends in high places etc. for a more rigid path, where those not in Confraternities are EXPLICITLY invited to take whatever mysteries they want.
Take the set of Inner Mysteries.
The set is composed of Minor Inner Mysteries and Major Inner Mysteries.
Non-Confraternity Verditus magi have access to the set of Inner Mysteries, therefore have access to Minor and Major Inner Mysteries.
Confraternity members have access to only a selection of that set, + 1 unique mystery not designated as part of that set.
Trade off.
Arts Student's variation of the Stats Creed: In God we trust; all others must show citations.
Again, consider answering the following to yourself:
1.) Why does the book say each confraternity has a unique inner mystery, and why does it always refer to such mysteries in the singular?
2.) Why do Balento and Himnis have different initiations for Bind Magical Creatures and Bind Curses from the vanilla examples if they are the only ones who can access them?
3.) Why does the book repeatedly and explicitly insist that Verditus magi have free reign to choose any Inner Mysteries they choose, if they didn't mean it?
4.) Why would the book have an explicit section that outlines the restrictions for membership and say that the only exception to these rules are for Confraternity members?
I've given page citations with quotations a few posts earlier. Its long, but if you can answer these questions people might have an inkling of what exactly it is you're talking about when you insist that we're "ignoring some sections..." when you've never shown us what those sections are.
J
Read my long post. I stated two ways of solving the contradictions at the beginning and showed a whole bunch of these contradictions again later.
No, you have not. One of them I showed to be the result of improper reasoning above. The others are in contradiction as I pointed out before, a contradiction that you refuse to do anything about and so still exists.
OK. You apparently have a huge reading comprehension problem. There is an important difference between definite and indefinite articles. I have a cat. His name is Jack. Does that contradict my also having a second cat named Leo? No, it does not. That there is a unique Inner Mystery does not explicitly state that there are not others. Statements of "the unique Inner Mystery" of a confraternity would necessarily limit them to one apiece. But "a unique Inner Mystery" does not. Happily, this avoids another contradiction occurring because one of them has two by our interpretation.
I addressed this. The order is as chosen. This is quite certainly not explicitly stated.
So you missed some. That's OK. I included them in my long post.
Clearly you haven't been reading what I've written very well. Up the next line my understanding is the same as yours. So are you really saying you've got it bass-ackwards?
Oh, this statement is wrong in so many ways. First, there are the unique Inner Mysteries which cease to be unique if your statement is correct. We all seem to agree these are those Minor Mysteries listed for initiation. Second, nothing says the members are limited to what mysteries they can get, just that they need to follow a specific order listed. Once complete they could move on to others.
No, the explicit statement says "Minor Inner Mysteries." That doesn't include Major Inner Mysteries.
Go to page 2 and READ!!! I've addressed what I've said with page citations. How is this "never shown." That you didn't read it or forgot about it doesn't mean I didn't show you. Everyone can see that I did.
Chris
Chris,
I've read your page 2 thing again. I'm still waiting on:
1.) Place where they say only Confraternity Members can hold Major Inner Mysteries. If you're going to say the authors overrule their statement that:
you need to show a direct quote that shows why this is not true.
2.) Why there is a general Initiation Script given for Bind Curses and for Bind Creatures, and a seperate one given for Himnis and Balento Confraternities if they're the only ones who can initiate them, as you say in your page 2 thing? In what way does this make any sense, whatsoever?
Why are you waiting to finish reading page 2. Just do it. I wrote the answer. I've written it again since. Note that the statement you quote says the order is irrelevant but doesn't say there are no other requirements for the House's Major Inner Mysteries. Why do you think it says something about other regulations when it says "in any order" and leaves out the "regulated only by..." for Minor Inner Mysteries? It is a statement about "the order." I would think that's pretty obvious. You clearly haven't read what I've written well or you would notice I'm not saying that statement is not true, so I don't need to show it's not true. I'm saying that statement is about the "order," not about all the "regulations," which is what the other statement is about.
You clearly aren't reading very well. I have told you already that up until the first list of confraternity Virtues that the only argument that works is that the unique Inner Mysteries are Major Inner Mysteries. But then that is contradicted afterward. If you would please read what I've written properly you will see I'm not saying that the Major Inner Mysteries are the unique Inner Mysteries because that conclusion falls to a contradiction well before the one you mention above. It already falls apart within the confraternity descriptions, and I pointed that out. What I said is that certain statements logically lead to that conclusion and certain statements contradict that conclusion. The same is true of every other possibility. Remember, my whole point was that all the choices for confraternity Virtues are contradicted at some point so things are ambiguous.
Chris
Hey Chris,
You'll have to forgive me. I'd just been having a lot of trouble figuring out what exactly your issue was.
If I understand correctly, you're just not convinced that there is any right answer and are confused by contradictory signals.
I still disagree that there are any contradictory signals, but if that's the only problem, its easily solved.
The books are written with a mind to keep characters and challenges balanced and fun. You'll note that the book encourages players to consider inventing their own Confraternities, using the examples as templates. Ditto initiation scripts.
Anything that is too massively unbalanced has been massively explicitly cautioned against. For example, Craft Magic, as written, would turn Verditus Magi into absolute tanks if allowed in that House (Enchanted Casting Tools combinded with Craft Magic would allow a mid-high-level magus to create a 10th magnitude plus Lesser Enchanted Item every 3 days), so the Societas book outright says that the two are incompatible.
Even if you think the technical language is too unclear, you have to admit that there's no logical game-balance reason why a player couldn't pick and choose the Mysteries s/he wants on her own path. That, at least, is the spirit in which the chapter seems to have been written.
(Or, if you want to play a hyper-power saga, so ahead and toss Craft Magic in there.... and turn your Covenant's turb into the world's first mechanised commandos. 
)
Roughly, yes. More precisely, I'm convinced there is no right answer in the text due to the contradictions, and so I remove the confusion by choosing the option that seems the most likely to me to be what was intended. The more confusing part to me is giving advice to others. Since every interpretation can be shown to be incorrect, we cannot give many definite answers when asked questions until the person asking let's us know what interpretation they're using. Otherwise the best replies should be that all or almost all of us here like to interpret it a certain way, and it works well that way. But if someone does read it another way, we can't say they're incorrect.
Chris
I'll have to look at Craft Magic. I've heard others mention it utility, but it's one I haven't read up on in quite a while.
Chris
It's not the clearest section, either. But here's something for consideration: The trade off for Craft Magic is that you can make L.E.I.s and charged items way faster, you have to use your Casting Total rather than your Lab Total.
No Verditus Runes. No Magic Theory. No Laboratory bonuses. And, with Weak Spontaneous, it has to be the effect of a Formulaic spell you know.
But, if you initiate Enchant Casting Tools, you can turn this into a plus.
Consider two Creo and Auram at 13. Add in a Minor Focus: Wood. Now, make an Enchanted Tool for Charge of the Angry Winds. Cr 13, Au 13+13, Magic theory 7 (8) + Phil and bonuses (8) + Craft 7 (8) + Aura (4) + Intel (3) + Lab Bonuses (7) = Lab Total 77/2 = 39 usable.
39 - 15 = up to + 24 to Casting total from Tool. Heck, make the casting tool an actual tool your character uses in his/her craft.
Now your Casting Total when using Craft Magic to create an LEI of Charge of the Angry Winds that concentrates on its own is: 39 + 4 + 6 (Foci) + 24 = 76, as high as the Lab Total!
Spend your seasons studying or on adventure, and make very decent LEIs when you have a spare day to two, or spend a year making an army's worth of charged items.
Now that's a magus whose covenant you don't want to mess with.
You see the balance problem.
1 Like
Craft Magic?
From soietates, correct? The Ex Misc tradition?
The stuff that (IIRC) explcitly doesn't work with Verditius Magic (Nobles Parma)?
Nice! I had not given craft magic much attention. It looks like something my players will encounter in Cliffheart in brief time. 
"Winter" does not equal "weak" :mrgreen:
(Cliffheart is one of the covenants that opposed their move to create a covenant in the isle of Mann and have been trying to put up an effort to get them outsted of the island. being how they (and I!) are, my troupe has taken an aggeessive stance once the diplomatic effort failed)
Cheers,
Xavi
Kylie Minogue - Love at first sight
Is this the stirring anthem sung by the Mannish Covenfolk when preparing for war? 
More along the worst terror-causing Norse warrior nightmare of the legends your granpas tell you, but hey 
When you fear all the enemy warriors at Voice range your unit cohesion might suffer somewhat, spoecially if you suffer a lightning impact each time you hit their shields.
That would came down to scandinavian death metal, I guess.
Cheers,
Xavi
Yep. That's the point; there are some non-Verditus Mysteries that, when paired with Verditus, massively over-buff a magus of that House. Craft magic is one of them. Amulets might work, but would be a little much with a strong Verditus Magus: mobile circular protections v. Demons against Might 40....
Story and Symbol Magic also might not be over-much (actually, they'd kind of fit with the philosophy of the house), but Verditus Talismans are already stupid powerful, without adding free story boosts.
Verditus is a Cult that could easily be thrown way, way, way out of balance... the Mysteries they do have can be pick and mixed without breaking a sweat, and the care put into excluding super-buffs should leave a player feeling quite happy to take any path s/he chooses.
Vulcano, you're right. That would be a huge boon to a Verditius. I hadn't caught that back and forth between Lab Total and Casting Total to take advantage of both Mysteries (Craft Magic and Enchant Casting Tools). Nice eye.
Hmmm... by my reading it explicitly might. I know that seems like a strange comment, something being explicitly not stated one way or the other. There are two explicit pieces about the mix. One is that undergoing the process of the Verditius Initiation destroys Craft Magic, so defecting from the Rustic Magi to House Verditius will not work. But the other way could work, starting as a Verditius Mystagogue and then picking up Craft Magic. That's why there is a comment about Rusticani being sought after by Verditius Mystagogues. That doesn't imply Craft Magic can necessarily be incorporated, but it does specifically leave it open as a possibility.
Interestingly, if you go in that order, the order that might work, you could theoretically avoid Weak Spontaneous Magic. Similarly, you wouldn't get Spell Foci without a second Initiation with everything that would entail.
Chris
Your reading is formally correct. However: Not In My Saga!
YSMV
It's a little deeper then that, Vulcano. Hubris is a nasty, nasty flaw, and there's not much you can do about it. Any competent PC will see that number go up. Then there are the flaws that come stock with the mysteries you can learn from the house. Repairing Magic Items is great, but you give up any chance of Original Research or Ancient Magic, because all that stuff requires experimenting in the lab, and the Mystery gives you the flaw, can't experiment in the lab. Ugly choice there. Curses are neat, but the cost! Same for the one where you put "extra Vis" into an item, like it was a talisman. Nasty Roleplay fallout! Then there's the mystery that requires you take the Flaw: unable to cast without fire! As if casting tools weren't bad enough! No thank you. Now, I am assuming there is roleplay going on, and I am assuming Mysteries are found treasures from the past, not a easily modified game mechanic. Your mileage may vary.