I am re-reading the rules about learning spells from a teacher (ArM5 p.95), and have 2 questions.
First, can the teaching be done in a language other than Latin? Say one magus is from Thebes and uses Greek for his magic, while the other magus is from the Rhine and uses Latin for his magic, but they both know German. Can they teach each other? If they can, what is the minimum score in the language needed to do so? I would tend to say yes, but they need an effective score of at least 4 in the language.
Second, there seems to be a potential abuse in those rules. It states that "The number of spell levels you may learn in one season is equal to the teacher's highest applicable Lab Total." If the teacher has a very high lab total in a specific Te+Fo combination,what's to prevent him from teaching a very low level spell in that combination, just so that the total number of spell levels is higer for spells of other combinations?
For example, say the teacher has lab totals of 20 in both PeTe and CrAn, but is a specialist in InVi with a lab total of 50. By teaching even a single low-level InVi spell, he can now also teach 20 levels in PeTe and 20 levels CrAn spell in the same season -- something he would not have been able to do if he hadn't taught that low-level InVi spell. Seems counter-intuitive that by teaching the small additional spell, he can teach even more spell levels. Not necessarily bad, but rather weird... Thoughts?
Probably works this way. Since the student is inventing the spell at the same time, he's translating from the common language into the language of his magic, trying various combinations until he finds the right words that work the spell in the desired manner.
I'm not sure it's a big issue. Time is precious to a magus, and I can see a master teaching an apprentice a bunch of spells in the last few seasons, just to get it done. Even when two magi come together to learn spells like this, how likely is such an occurrence going to happen. I think being able to do this is important for rationalizing how a master imparts 150 levels of spells to an apprentice, but in play, I don't think I've ever seen it come up where one magus teaches another magus a spell. It's probably closer to here: "read my lab text."
I certainly see this as a possibility for our characters in Via Experimenta, but I'm not sure that even though it is possible that it would actually ever occur.
Well, I was thinking about how a magus might ask another (who is better at lab work), to invent some new spell(s) for him. It would be just as quick for the inventor to teach those spells to the second magus than to actually write them out. And, if they don't share a "magical" language (Latin or Greek), it might actually be easier to teach the spells directly.
I certainly don't see a magus writing lab texts in a mundane language like German. So this may actually happen in Via Experimenta.
Ok, it might not happen in Via Experimenta, then. But that does not remove the validity of the question.
Direct teaching is much more efficient from the learner's perspective, particularly when the spells are in Te+Fo combinations where he is relatively weak. Or if he has trouble working with lab texts (such as the Weak Scholar flaw). Or if he is short on time.
If someone owns you a season of service, what would you rather receive? Him scribing 100 levels of spells that will take you 5 (or perhaps more) seasons to learn? Or him taking a single season to teach you 60 levels of spells in a single season? While I agree that the lab texts are generally more useful, the time-saving benefits of the second option can be quite valuable as well.
Sure, it's efficient for the learner, not the teacher. Who is the one that is going to be deciding whether to teach spells he knows to someone...the teacher holds that power.
I find the scenario that a magus would owe another magus a season of service that doesn't have kind of restrictions to be unlikely, that season is a blank check. A magus might agree to a season of service to assist in the lab, or extract vis, because he's better at it, or something. The season is the amount of time used, but the actual result of that season is what's being agreed upon. So, let's say that it's an agreement to teach a spell, that's the agreement, when the spell is taught, it's done, never mind that the teacher could have taught more spells in the allotted time. Maybe the learning magus is smart, and it's an agreement to teach all the spells a magus can in a season. How does the magus learning the spell know what the teaching magus can teach?
I stipulate that what you propose is possible. I just find that it requires PCs have perfect knowledge of the world, or are perfectly cooperative with each other... Which is possible, but unlikely.
Not perfect knowledge, no. If you've seen that magus cast those spells, or mention that he knows those spell, then you can ask him to teach them to you. Magi living at the same covenant, for example, would have a fairly good idea of what their covenant-mates can do. The same might be true of for other magi with whom they have good ongoing relations. In the Rhine, for example, it might be a way for Gild members to share knowledge.
Now, I'm not saying that direct teaching of spell happen very often. I'm just suggesting that it is not limited to apprentices. Meaning that the potential loophole of the specialist teaching many more spells because he included a low-level spell from his specialty is worth discussing.
Yes, but just because a magus knows two spells that another magus wants to learn doesn't really say anything about the lab total of the magus who could teach them. The teaching magus might agree to teach one of the spells, and be done with it, while he is perfectly capable of teaching both and chooses not to do so. How does the learning magus know that the teaching magus could teach more in that season? That's where the perfect knowledge comes into play. The agreement will be something along the lines of, "I will teach you this spell." It won't be, "I will teach you all the spells I can," and if it is something like that, it's tough for the learning magus to know what the capabilities of the teaching magus really are without detailed observation.
Well, the simplest way to know is to ask him. "Would you be able to teach me more spells in that season, while you're at it?" After all, the roles may very well be reversed at some point.
I'm assuming that the magi are on good terms, while you seem to assume that the teaching magus will attempt to do as little as he can. His season will be spent anyway, so if he's friendly, why wouldn't he teach as much as he can (within reason)? It's good for his ego, if nothing else, to be able to show how much he knows.
Good terms is just that, the two magi negotiated the terms and found them agreeable. And now, the learning magi is asking for more, because it won't cost the teaching magi... Or does it?
Just because the two are on good terms doesn't mean you give it all away. Like I said, most agreements will be for something specific. If you come in and ask, well, since you're season's all used up, is there anything to teach me, a reasonable (paranoid) magus is going to think you had ulterior motives, to learn the full capabilities of your sodalis, perhaps exploit it later on. If the agreement is to teach all you can in a season, again, that's going to be kind of a thing that a magus might think, well, he's trying to figure out exactly how good I am at doing something.
The canonical history of the Order is replete with stories of magi of the same covenant fighting and killing each other, declaring Wizard's War or not. Magi come together in covenant for mutual benefit, to be sure. But that doesn't mean that they share all they know... I don't think any covenant comes together and sings kumbaya and shares everything.
Of course they don't, that's not what I'm saying. But some spells are so common and useful that there is no reason not to let your convenant-mates know that you have them. So it may simply be a case of: "Hey, I've noticed that you have quite a few spells that I'd find useful. Would you teach them to me? I'll return the favor, as I'm sure you've noticed that I have a number of spells that you could find useful yourself."
I find it strange that you argue that covenant-mates would keep the spells they know secret from each other, when you suggested in Via Experimenta that each magus would be willing to scribe most (if not all) of their spells for the covenant's library pre-saga. If nothing else, that would explain why they know about each others' spells.
You have to keep in mind the indirect information you're revealing when you're teaching. Knowing a spell doesn't specifically translate to a lab total, and therefore Art scores. It establishes a minimum. The more a magus teaches in a season the more the person comes to discover how great or small his lab total is. It's a subtle distinction. And yes, there are other ways of doing this, but those rely upon careful observation over a long time.
If a magus doesn't care to telegraph what his art scores are, it's not a problem, but there is a distinct difference between submitting a lab text to a common library and teaching multiple spells in a season.
I'm not saying that they keep the spells they know secret from each other, at all. And I think what I'm saying as a player that, starting a new saga and also a new covenant, is that we submit all the lab texts, as an OOC discussion. They're translated from the shorthand for free. That says nothing about teaching spells from one magus to another.
I'm saying that I can envision a magus not want to teach up to his maximum in a season because it communicates a lot about his lab total, which is by extension his knowledge of Magic Theory, Intelligence and Art Scores. One can generally guestimate magic theory and intelligence. If we know that most magi have a +2 or +3 intelligence in the Order, and the magi generally know this, then we can subtract that from the lab total, then we subtract the aura, then we subtract the magic theory estimate based on age, House, and other things. That leaves you with Art scores....a clever magus can also determine which art is the stronger, the Technique or the Form based on other information he might know. The spells aren't necessarily what the magus wants to keep secret, but how strong or how weak his Arts are and whether he wants the individual (and his friends) to know could be the determinant.
Is Praxiteles like this? Probably not. Looking at his character sheet, most of the spells he knows fatigue him, due to the +2 int and -1 Stamina... He knows more than he can do. Does he want others to know that, too? It's an interesting question to tackle as a player.
...and yet there are many other ways that telegraph's a magus' Art scores. Writing a summa; the number of tractatus one can write on that Art. The power of a magic item on can create in a season for the covenant, the number of pawns of Vim vis one can extract in a season. The list goes on and on. And those are all on activities that the magi will discuss at a council meeting. None of them give less information than the teaching spells.
What limits the spells you will actually teach is rather related to what spells you are willing to share, rather that how big your lab totals are. Paranoia exists, to be sure, but between covenant-mates? From what I've seen, covenant-mates seem to share rather more information than less. Paranoia within a covenant is the exception, not the rule.
Regardless of all that, the rules remain there, clearly written in the main rulebook. No matter how often they are used in a specific saga, that was the point of this thread. To discuss the rule itself. To see in what ways that rule makes sense, or not.
Namely: including a low-level spell from your specialty allows you to teach more spell levels than what you'd be able to do without it, even if most of the spells are from outside of that specialty.
Would a different formula have made more sense? For example, the teacher being able to communicate up to Magic Theory * 10 levels in a single season. Perhaps adding Com (or Int) to the MT score?
Or, from a different viewpoint, there is no loophole but it's off in the other direction. Perhaps all magi are supposed to be able to teach at their best TeFo level in general but not quite as well in areas outside this; the system becomes flawed if they don't include one of these spells among the ones they're teaching. Figuring there is a loophole to abuse requires an assumption where the oddity slips into the rules, and it's just an assumption. If you view it this way, then the oddity can only be a penalty, so it's no big deal.
Yeah, I got off topic. Sorry.
The alternatives you mention make it possible for a person to be able to know a spell that they cannot teach. Think of the Flambeau with negative Com or low Int and low Magic Theory.
Yes, the example you mention could happen, but would that be a bad thing? If he's such a bad communicator with a weak grasp of Magic Theory, isn't it normal that he cannot communicate his most complicated magics to another Hermetic Magus?
A valid point of view, but I still find that weak as regards to the actual mechanics of teaching spells. If that was the intent, why not simply state that the highest lab total indicate the total levels of spells that can be imparted in a season? After all, such a trick has been used for the familiar bonding rules, and for the enchantment capacity of a talisman.
As it is written, the rule encourages such oddities as repeatedly teaching a 1st magnitude spell from your highest specialty, even if the student already knows that spell, just to make it possible to teach him more spell levels in that season.
It's a 35th level Ball of Abysmal Flame from one Flambeau master to his apprentice. His apprentice has a lab total sufficient to understand the spell, if taught from a lab text. The master can easily teach it based on his CrIg lab total, which is augmented by a focus or something. Under RAW, he can teach it, and maybe teach something else to the student in that season. Under the MT functioning as a cap proposal, he can't, because his MT is 5, but he has a Com -2, capping him to 30th level spells. That's a tough one to come to terms with, since the magus with a negative com has a lot of other disadvantages during apprenticeship. Now he can't pass on his spells to his apprentice as a legacy, until he gets his MT up to 6?
I think it's a solution in search of a problem. When it starts getting abused, it's time to HR it. Until then, let it stand, because I don't see getting it abused all that often. I could be wrong though.
Change the numbers, then. Even the Com (or Int) affecting the total was optional. It could be just a straight MT20 levels, similar to the number of spell levels that you can write in a seaon, which is Latin20.
My suggestion is simply off the cuff. A direction where to look for an alternative.
Of course it is a quite a small problem! Doesn't actually needs fixing.
But then, picking rules apart is fun for its own sake, isn't it?
