Legality of Manipulating Another Covenant's Covenfolk

Oh, that's easy...if the child is released from the apprenticeship, they can be claimed as an apprentice in retaliation. :wink:

From our understanding of the discussion about scrying on True Lineages p.52 this is only somewhat true, mentioning the potential for an invisible/shapeshifted Magus to bring a suit against the covenant whose ground he is on, though saying that such a suit is unlikely to be successful. This would imply to most of us that simply being invisible/shapeshifted within another covenant is not enough to be illegal (though because Mentem Magus is casting a spell at the covenant it would probably be illegal here and, if not, I imagine most Magi at Tribunal would support the covenant using force to subdue him). Regardless, Mentem Magus is unconcerned about this because he is certain he won't be caught.

If done by a Hermetic Magi would this possibly be a low crime relating to not properly training an apprentice, since Hermetic Magi cannot train someone without the Gift? Of course it could still be ruled that the hedge witch also committed the crime since she didn't actually intend on training the child. Does the Order even recognize non-gifted apprentices as actual apprentices under the Oath (other than Redcaps, which may be precedent or exception)? True Lineages doesn't offer much help, with most of the clarification specifically saying Gifted child, thus excluding Redcap apprentices from much of the wording. Of course since Redcaps are from one house, the Order may very well ignore the rights and obligations of their apprentices until inducted into the order, leaving it as a house matter.

I don't foresee this being of any practical concern in our saga but it is fun to think about.

under the code an exmiscelania is not a hedge witch, they are a magus. There are no provisions for an ungifted apprentice because aside from verditius nobody expects anyone to take them - verditius could easily take craft apprentices who are not considered hermetic apprentices and aren't covered under the code. They would probably rely on this as a basis for any rulings, understanding that in the case of verditius if the mundane apprentice can aid their craft score for a lab onus they are a magical resource...

Sorry I used the wrong term; by an Ex Misc Hedge Witch I meant a full member of the Order, but one who uses the Folk Witch (not Hedge Witch) magical tradition from the Hedge Magic book. Non-Gifted people can be trained to use Folk Witch magic, though it's much more difficult and less effective for them.

As a side note, about using this massive Creo Mentem spell...
Considering it has instant/perm duration, it could be difficult to track accurately if InVi are not done quickly after the casting. However, since the spell create loyalty/love towards somebody, one could say, the target of the loyalty is likely to be the caster.

Now, what if the sneaky caster was making sure that the loyalty was towards another target, like for example an enemy mage from another covenant. :slight_smile:
... just saying...

Of course, the culprit will face serious charge because he is really stirring some serious sh*t.

Now, of course, if the power is demonically infused, then Intellego spell will fail. So what if the faerie trickster or an imp was aware of the mage intention and decide to spike the situation...

Just adding element to mess up the situation. It has so much potential to become a huge mess of finger pointing and politicking.

The case you are referring to specifically states that if you are a guest at a covenant and use magic to communicate out of the covenant that you are guesting then you are unlikely to be successful in pressing charges against your hosts if their anti-scrying device detects that fact that you are communicating, but not what you are communicating. Likewise the book says that if a magus is hanging around another covenant while "invisible" or shapeshifted and is detected by magic at the covenant then he has technically been scry'ed upon but he is unlikely to have a case.

True lineages also says:
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.


Magi are unlikely to bring a successful case for being
spotted while invisible or shapeshifted within another’s

Using this ruling to conclude that you can freely sneak around "invisibly" in another covenant is a not at all supported by the code of Hermes. In fact I would say that sneaking around another covenant while hidden by magic is as clear a break of the provision against scrying as you can get. Using magic to sneak around undetected in a covenant that is not your own is definitely not okay, but using magic to detect such sneaking around in your own covenant is fine.

In this case the harm done or intended is spellcasting on literally everyone in the covenant (or assuming that the caster can convince a tribunal that he cast forcelessly then everyone except the magi), the harm done or intended is pretty serious. In addition anything the magus overhears or otherwise learns of while being "invisible" while constitute a breach of the code regardless of whether he/she was trying to learn it. This is made pretty clear in the core rulebook, where it states "That simply walking around while invisible is magical scrying" and that
you just have to learn about a magus' activities. This might be as little as overhearing two covenfolk say something like "Have seen magus Balthazar? He is always in his lab these days, the explosions sound really dangerous" I know this might seem like a trivial thing to learn, but it is knowledge about the activities of the magus (he is working on a lab project that involves explosions) and the core book further states that "in general Tribunals have taken a very strict view of what constitutes magical scrying (all quotes from the core book are taken from page 14).

I used "invisible" in quotes here because I dont mean invisiblity in the strict sense of an Imaginem spell that destroys the species that you emit but any form of magic that make you hard to spot or forces people to overlook you, really any use of magic that makes it less likely that people will detect you.

Have a look at GotF (Guardians of the Forest) p.72 upper box Cr(Mu)Me 25 (Eye, Sun, Ind) My New Best Friend and MoH (Magi of Hermes) p.92 (Eye, Sun, Ind) My Old and Dear Friend. Both show the need to shape a target's memory to lay the ground of a friendly reaction, and in case of the former spell a Friendly to Caster +3 Personality Trait. If the Mutoed memory expires, the target can look through the deception.

Wouldn't suddenly becoming Friendly to Caster +3 without any reason be that unmotivated, that in a covenant the target should consider herself ensorcelled at once and look for help?

I think you are using the term "permanent" wrong there, and that "mundane, lasting the spell" terminology suits better, because "permanent" might be confused with a spell duration. When you have a spell duration going on, the spell just keeps happening, so for example if you have a ReMe spell with a duration to keep someone sleeping (or being loyal to your magus), they keep doing so and can't be awaken (or stop being loyal) for the duration, as opposed to spells with momentary duration which put people to sleep, where they can be naturally awaken afterwards.

You use ritual creo magic to create things that are actually mundane: you can use Conjure the Mystic Tower to create a tower, but it's not magic: if you hit your head against it Parma won't stop it, if you shake it with an earthquake it will crumble, and so on. You don's use ritual creo magic to cast actually permanent stuff: you can't use a ritual CrIg, CrAu or CrIm to create everlasting fires, storms or illusions, because the nature of fires is to burn out when they get out of fuel, of storms to go around for a while and then dissolve, and images are species that don't stand still in place. So I think no matter how much vis the magus invest on this spell: it will create a mundane loyalty to the magus, which will immediately start to fade off, probably quite fast as I assume most mundanes won't even know the casting magus they are supposed to be loyal to.

If he wants that loyalty to endure, he should put an actual duration to the spell, and the spell should last for that duration, and probably after that fade naturally. Anything else is a big can of worms.

1 Like

"Wouldn't suddenly becoming Friendly to Caster +3 without any reason be that unmotivated, that in a covenant the target should consider herself ensorcelled at once and look for help?"

I think it depends on context - if everyone else in the covenant expresses the feeling at the same time, then it won't seem unnatural to you and you may not think it's unusual. To anyone else (say a grog who was out collecting firewood or had gone to market when the ritual went off, and comes back later) it will be very obvious that something is up.

Would the magi notice - depends on their relationship with their covenfolk. Aloof lab rats or very arrogant magi might never notice, those with a close working relationship with grogs might figure it out immediately. A verditius who has forge assistants or a jerbiton who enjoys long chats with his stablehands and huntsmen could be tipped off within hours and start investigating.

If a spell is cast with zero penetration, then any legal hermetic apprentice will be unaffected by the spell, as their arts will have been opened, granting them a Mentem art score of 0. This gives them a Magic Resistance of 0, as well, which would require a penetration total of at least one to bypass.

Any "apprentice" affected by such an effect would not legally be anyone's apprentice.

You are correct; With a brief bit of reading... Suppressing one's Parma also suppresses your form bonuses, and that fact is what confused me.

If you can't think of a reason for that feeling it will appear unnatural to you, right? If all can't think of a reason it will appear even more unnatural. And if you all have no memories of the being you have these feelings about, it just stinks of being ensorcelled.

1 Like

Targeting covenfolk of another covenant or even other magi with Creo Mentem magic instilling positive emotions is not against the Code per se. However, if it makes any other result easier, and accomplishing that result through magic would be against the Code, then it is an act against the Code. For example, if those covenfolk reveal secrets under the influence of magic which they would have otherwise kept hidden, under most circumstances counts as scrying. Magically convincing a magus to part with magical treasure counts as depriving him of magical power. Magically convincing a magus to vote the way you want counts as failing to respect his vote. And ultimately, there's that vague, catchall "endangering the Order" clause.

Making a maga fall in love with you so that you can have a torrid night of passion together? Fair game (unless, you know, it angers the faerie lord who's her lover). Making the covenfolk of another covenant like you, so that you get good food, a nice clean warm bed and the like? Fair game. Making a redcap feel that he really really should be extra careful about keeping that letter of yours safe? Fair game. Of course being legal, and being tolerated, are two very different things. There's always Wizard's War.

1 Like