Indeed. If one reads carefully and in full the section in HoH:TL p.52 that was referenced, one will notice that any information gained (even accidentally) on a magus or his "affairs", and any attempt to gain such information (even if it fails), with the help of magic constitutes scrying - with just two major caveats:
a) If the information gained is about some violation of the Oath, gaining it is not a violation of the Oath. Basically, the Oath protects one's privacy, but only for stuff that stays within the Oath. However, if you suspect a violation, scry (i.e. obtain information magically) to confirm it, and your suspicion turns out wrong, you have violated the Oath - no "Oh, I thought that ..." defense.
b) In general, the punishment is commensurate to 1) the intent and 2) the information gained. As an extreme example, if magic was used that could have gained information, but there was neither intent to gain it, nor any information gain, then while technically it's still scrying the violator will always be acquitted. Another example is a magus conducting magical surveillance of his own covenant's grounds; if he accidentally "detects" a shapeshifted guest, said guest is unlikely to be able to get the magus prosecuted, even though technically the magus has scried upon the guest. Note that many variations of this case actually fall under case a): if another magus is using magic to disguise himself in his interactions with you or your "affairs", and you use magic that pierces or attempts to pierce his disguise, you are not illicitly scrying, because he is.
However, any use of magic (not just Intellego spells) to
spy or aid spying into a magus’s legal affairs is considered
an offense. As always the penalty will depend on the harm
done or intended.
HoH:TL p52
Intentional scrying that succesfully finds magical secrets will be punished harshly.
Unintentional scrying that didn't reveal anything important is technically still a High Crime, but is unlikely to result in much more than a slap on the wrist.
Intentional scrying to find out something relatively unimportant - like what a certain magus usually has for breakfast - will be punished, but the punishment is unlikely to be terribly severe.
A random thought to throw into this discussion: Hermetic law only covers magic; it really doesn't care about anything else. Murder is not a Hermetic crime, nor is theft, or fraud, or kidnapping, or extortion, or any other sort of sleazy thuggery -- except where magic, mages, magical power, and magical secrets are involved.
If there are no magical 'stakes' involved, then it is a matter for civil law.
Hmm, not really. "I will not slay nor attempt to slay any member of the Order" covers any attempt at slaying: via magic, mundane means, intermediaries, etc. It's just the provision on scrying that's limited to magic-use: “I will not use magic to scry upon members of the Order of Hermes, nor shall I use it to peer into their affairs".
But limiting all the constraints the Oath imposes to those activities carried out by magic would certainly make for an interesting twist to a saga!
'A member of the Hermetic Order' is magical stakes if they are the victim; but it does not cover mundanes (except Redcaps and maybe apprentices) at all. Stealing from (or killing) the local Duke is not a Hermetic crime... unless it leads to (or might lead to) repercussions which affect other members of the Order.
Oh, I see what you mean now. I thought you meant that killing another magus via mundane means was "ok", like peering in his affairs via mundane means is ok. Instead you mean that the Oath only applies to activities that somehow affect magi.
Well, the Oath ultimately is about protecting Hermetic magi from dumb actions by their peers, so yes, you can do incredibly evil stuff and it will still be ok, Oath-wise, as long as it does not endanger your peers (or, more generally, fall into a broad cathegory of behaviour that would frequently endanger them).
I think Joseph is talking about murdering someone not attached to the Order. I think it would be quite hard to murder someone without hitting the "interference with mundanes" clause, but if you could, then I think he's right. You might make Hermetic enemies anyway.
Interference with mundanes only matter if it results in negative consequences for the Order or members thereof. Kill a peasant somewhere and burn down his farm? Perfectly legal, as long as either the act or perpetrator are not discovered, or solely results in consequences for the magus, and not any loss of reputation for other mages, for example. Wizard War remains a tool for internal policing, so take care to not be too personally odious though. And, of course, avoid accusations of Infernal dealings.
I give my grog a ring of invisibility and he slips into my rival's bedroom and seduces his wife. My rival finds out and kills the grog. In most tribunals that is it, the ring was a gift and thus not mine (deprivation of magical power) so the rival gets the ring and case closed.
If while my grog is sleeping with his wife he discovers notes about the meeting to a secret society and sees information I would be interested in and brings it back to me, Grog's actions, grog's decision, case closed.
Now if I hand my grog a ring of invisibility and tell them "I'm lending you this ring so you can spy on my rival's secret society and bring me their secrets' sure, then I am using my magic (the ring is lent, not gifted) to execute my will to spy on my rival.
I'm not saying scrying is legal so long as you use a grog as an intermediary, I'm saying the code only applies to magi, and giving allies the means to scry on your rivals is not against the code. Those allies then sharing information the have discovered is also not against the code, so long as 8you* do not use magic to obtain the information about another magus of the order. So scrying on someone who has information about your rival would also be forbidden...
I'd add this insight. The scrying crimes are a spectrum of crimes that range from High Crime to trivial/petty court case.
High Crime for which a Magi might be Marched but more likely punished by order of most to least severe: Death of Familiar > Break of Familiar bond > Banishment from Tribunal > Loss of Apprentice > Investing Items for Guernicus/Mercere houses > Seasons of service for Guernicus/Mercere house
Magical scrying had the intent to learn magical cult/house secrets (that are protected by many other Magi) leading to real damage and loss to said cult/house
Magical scrying with intent other than learn magical secrets but still landed said secrets leading to said real damage
Magical scrying with intent & securing secrets but do damage
I'm of the opinion that none will get you marched. Banishment in the cases with intent. Seasons of work for magical scrying that landed on secrets by accident. If no intent & no secrets, Magical scrying charges will go nowhere. You'd have to uncover a secret that puts the order in danger and then put it in danger and then, if all the proof is there, then you get to be marched.
As the system might fell unjust for some petty Magi, there is a likeliness that scrying on something nefarious will lead to wizards wars, not scrying charges. Keep in mind that as per HoH:TL, the grand tribunal has decided that the tribunal cannot profit from a conviction and the accuser can, at most, get 25% of the fine. This puts an upper cap on what the tribunal can impose as punishment and unless a Quaesitor spent years making the case against you, will probably just mean that the accuser will not get much. In the Thebes tribunal, even a conviction of a high crime only gets you some yellow tickets which you can offset using get out of prison cards or, if you do not have any at hand, by doing services for the tribunal.
The game is slightly rigged to allow players to do scrying and not be charged of anything... other than good stories.
The Oath of Hermes explicitly states no Scrying on the affairs of Magi - Hence it is automatically a High Crime.
Any High crime is punishable by Wizard's March.
The Tribunal meeting that decides the case might be argued down to a lesser punishment based on circumstances and politics.
I am unaware of any Peripheral Code Ruling that automatically removes the option of Wizard's March for Scrying.
Which is why I am interested in determining the probable contours of what constitutes "Scrying".
I am aware there will always be outlying edge cases that would not be considered probable. eg In a really bad political situation a stacked Tribunal might accept a charge of Scrying if a hated mage inquires if the local Redcap is on schedule.
Out of curiousity, are Magi in the habit of Gifting grogs with enchanted items? I thought we are playing in a Feudal era where superiors gift inferiors, with the expectation of service in return.
Just wondering if a Tribunal would easily believe an enchanted device as a free gift without obligation.
Case indeed closed. You're guilty of scrying and forcing an innocent man to seduce another man's wife. Grogs have no separate standing under the Code, their actions are your actions. QED.
Commoner having their own free will, what a bizarre idea. Maybe in 400 years...
Please do assume the legal standards on the Enlightenment (or even Rome) are valid in the 13th century.
I don't think the case is closed either way. Your grog is not your slave, and his actions are not legally yours. You could mount a defence that you had no way of knowing this would happen, but I think you'd have to show why it was a surprise.
If I was a Quaesitor presented with this defence, I'd start with Frosty Breath and go right through InVi and InMe looking for signs that you had tampered with his own memory, moving on to looking for influences on the grog. I would ask why you'd given him the ring and how long ago. It would be in the your favour if you'd punished the grog for their misdeed, but a Machiavellian mage would think nothing of ostentatiously punishing a loyal servant. It would also help your case if you had come to the Quaesitors immediately, instead of being caught later.
And I would bear in mind the possibility that you had a good reason to give their grog the ring, and someone else is setting you up, by using Mentem on the grog.
TL p.53 "If there was no intent, but secrets were revealed, damages will be awarded. If there was no intent or secrets revealed the case is trivial."
Note it says that damages will be awarded, not will be Marched. And this is a case where it is proven that the Magi used a magical scrying effect directly on a Magi and secured secrets! His defence was that he didn't intend on learning secrets that the Magi had... also says that if no intent & no secrets == no charges.
Killing a Magi by March is serious stuff and will only happen in the most serious affairs where it places the order in danger.
Same books goes on to say "Magi are unlikely to bring a successful case for being spotted while invisible or shape shifted within another’s covenant." & "The scrying prohibition was instituted to protect magi’s legitimate magical secrets, not their crimes. Any act performed while committing, or in preparation to commit, a crime is considered outside the protection of the Code (see above). Magi are therefore free to use magic to investigate criminal activities." & " As magi who cooperate with a Tribunal are so rarely cast out" (Marched).
Even killing anothe Magi outside of a war does not get you Marched! "Gravis of House Flambeau was charged with slaying Talus of House Merinita. Gravis claimed forfeit immunity as Talus had cast a spell on him. Renowned for his practical jokes, Talus had cast a spell that made Gravis’s voice sound like a little girl’s, to the great mirth of all others present. Gravis responded with a Ball of Abyssal Flame, which slew Talus. As Talus’s spell was clearly not a threat to Gravis’s life or magic the Tribunal found him guilty, but due to the clear provocation refrained from calling a Wizard’s March. Gravis was punished by the death of his familiar."
Depends on what you mean by "case closed" in this situation. Obviously these being wizards the facts need to be verified, but if I gave the grog the ring as a reward for some earlier quest (say to infiltrate a dwarven kingdom) and he decided on his own to try and use it to 1) visit a lady he was "in love" with, and 2) follow up by trying to further ingratiate himself to me by discovering secrets that I was unaware he had found anything out about, then I think I am pretty well covered and the case will not go to tribunal (hence closed)
I would also further posit that if said grog succeeded and gave me those secrets, without telling me how he got them (besides berhap "you don't want to know") Then I would still be in the clear.
Unless the secrets are bigger than the secrets of the individual magi (not house/cult/cotterie secrets) then yes, it probably will not mount to anything that would deserve the attention of a tribunal.
But the "Victim" Magi might feel different & still give you trouble. He might kill the grog and keep the magical object. He might ask an amount of Vis to you to "close the case" and if you refuse, contract a Quaesitor to investigate which will likely at the very least stain your reputation. He might, if he is a reasonable, challenge you to a certamen to resolve the dispute & if not reasonable, declare you a wizard war & take from you whatever he feels is proper repayment.
If the Stolen secrets were House/Cult/Cotterie secrets, then you have other parties that will be impacted and unhappy about the indiscretion and you might get into bigger trouble. Afterall, this grog has ties to you hand has been empowered by you (Magical object) and has reported back to you. If that is the case, I'd start by mind wiping the grog, take away his magical object to show good faith. Then offer them to pay back by services and be properly initiated into the said secret.
As far as I recall, you do have a certain responsibility for magic items given or sold to mundanes, so either this was your grog, and therefore your agent, albeit acting on his own initiative, and thus you would be held responsible, or you gave out a magical item that was used in a way harmful to a member of the Order, which would at the very least result in harm to your reputation.
If I was a Quaesitor, and this was the story I was told, I think I would take it to the Tribunal. I agree that the chances are good that the wizard might be found innocent. But it should be put before the magi of the tribunal for their consideration. If nothing else, it means they all know this has happened and can take appropriate precautions, and one of them might know something of relevance to the case.
Somebody lost their magical secrets. This is a big deal! Another reason for taking this to the Tribunal is to make it less likely that the victim will start a Wizard War.