I'm not sure that's the crux. Even if it happens once, you have to go through and translate the lab texts (for everyone else in the covenant) to add them to the library. Or perhaps not, just leave the shorthand with the lab texts. One imagines the OP was in part because of such an event. Say I run into a cache of 500 levels of spells and/or enchantments, I'd rather spend one season (or however many) as a magus deciphering and then hand off the rest of the job to some flunky...
I figure you get the right combo f arts, translate the highest level spell, another season translating your lab notes, then a mundane scribe (with magic theory 1+) can take it from there using your translated lab notes.
of course it varies depending on campaign how often one runs across a scribe trained in both Latin and magic theory. (though to be fair it is more rare to find one trained in magic theory but not Latin...)
The largest impact this will have on the game is to have a scribe help a mage translate that magi's notes. How many spells does a mage invent in say, fifty years? How many items does a Verdi make in that time? Spend a season translating your won shorthand (make sure it's high level), then hand off to a scribe to translate hundreds of levels f lab/item texts. That same scribe can then copy those texts to sell.
The impact of this proposal will be to make lab texts plentiful (and devalue them strongly), with many copies of unique spells running around, what was once formerly rare will be as common as dirt. This may produce stories where Verditius realize a mundane scribe created an insight text for Verditius magic (because of how many lab texts they had to copy), or the Cult of Heroes trying (perhaps in vain?) to limit the number of stat boosting texts (or cause order wide warping by widespread use of those texts).
I'm not convinced it a good idea, but that's really a call for your saga to make.
1 Like
I say no. To me it's the difference between decoding and translating. I think a lot of people read the description of translating Lab Text and think it's like decoding an encrypted message. But I think it's more like translating from one language to another.
Decrypting is an easy problem if you have a key. Translating is much harder because you need context and someone with no score in the Arts will never have that context.
2 Likes
I'd like to cautiously and tentatively agree with maine75man here, especially in his choice of metaphor.
The language from ArM5 completely disagrees with this as it uses those two words differently than you do. "Decoding" is the laboratory activity. "Translating" "is a simple process, and does not require a laboratory." Note that this "translation" process is simple compared to the difficult "decoding." It seems a far better analogy would be that the laboratory "decoding" part would be breaking a code; and once the code has been broken, using the cypher is a simple process and described here as "translating." ArM5's "translation" of lab texts is what you call "decrypting."
How does this fit the following: Magus 1 has a high CrCo Lab Total (and Latin 5) and goes through the process of understanding Magus 2's CrCo75 spell. Now that Magus 1 can translate Magus 2's spells, Magus 1 translates a ReMe50 spell, even though Magus 1 has scores of 0 in both Rego and Mentem and only has a lab total of 25. Meanwhile, Magus 3 has a a ReMe Lab Total of 45 (with Rego 15 and Mentem 15 and Latin 4) and so would need two seasons to get that ReMe50 spell in the first place and even if he already had the method would require more time to translate the ReMe50 spell than would Magus 1. It would seem scores in the relevant Arts do not factor in as you describe. Those scores are relevant for breaking the code but not for translating once the decryption method is known.
2 Likes
Whether translating or decoding is the right word to describe the activity of making intelligible the short hands, codes and possible foreign language(s) a magus is using when taking quickly note during his research, I leave that to native English speaker. But it is clear to me that there is a code which goes beyond simple word to word substitution. There are symbols, reference to obscure measure system, possibly astrological or stars only used by certain traditions...
The fact that RAW said that lab is needed would make me believe that not only the translating mage is pouring over the notes with various thesaurus, but needs to validate certain assumptions on his translation by performing experiment in the lab. Does "un pouce de vitriol" means one thumb of sulfuric acid ? knowing that the magus was giant-blooded, is it base on his thumb ? or his assistant thumb ? or is it a weight measure taught to him by his master worth "une douzaine de graine de caroube" (a dozen of carob tree seeds)? is it carob tree or locust tree considering that he was born and raised in Levant tribunal ?
... mmmm let's do some trials...
In this case, it is obvious for me that a score in Arts is required.
What if the code was translated for a given Te + Form, could subsequent translations of lower lab text of the same Te+Form be done by somebody without Arts score ? Frankly, it seems to me a lot of book keeping for little story benefits, and if my players were advocating this kind of change, it would sound to me like trying to min-max their season usage to the extreme.
Either a mage is really interested in his sodales work, then he dedicates the time required to understand his work or he does not. And in this case, he won't even delegate the task, he has better thing to give the scribe to do.
The RAW says you need a lab to decipher the shorthand, not to translate. Deciphering the shorthand is done on an initial lab text and it is done as a lab activity. Translation of the initial lab text happens contemporaneously to the period of the deciphering the shorthand. Subsequent lab text translations do not need a period of deciphering and are therefore not lab activities, as that has already happened, and one can write out lab texts that have had their shorthand deciphered as if they are one's own, so long as the level of the spell being translated is less than or equal to the level of the spell that was originally deciphered.
Is it unreasonable to presume that a magus, spending time to workout the shorthand won't create a lab text (remember it's a lab activity, so there should be a text). And that text is then used in subsequent translations. I would also rule that this lab text to be used for translating is not in the translating magus's shorthand, but in a general format that can be handed to anyone.
Rise, thread! Rise from the grave!
Since we are doing errata and clarifications, let's have a look at this one.
I think it is clear that unGifted scribes can copy translated Lab Texts, and need Magic Theory 1 to avoid corrupting them, but do say if you think that is not clear. I think this is the right answer, and I can't see any way to block it that looks coherent in the game world.
First question: Should unGifted scribes be able to translate Lab Texts?
This is not a question about the RAW, because we are considering errata and they can be rewritten, but about what you think should happen.
In theory, the answer to this question makes a massive difference to the background. In practice, I don't think anyone has really thought about the provenance of translated Lab Texts too carefully, so we could wave our hands in either direction to make things fit. So, please answer in terms of how you think it would play out in your saga. If you can give reasons, that would help the debate. (I resurrected this thread because people have given arguments above. Those people may have changed their minds in the last eight years, however.)
If you think the answer is "yes, they should be able to translate", then the question is how they can get the ability to do so. They cannot follow the procedure given in the rules, because for that you need a Lab Total and a lab. How do you think they can do it? Here is a suggestion to bounce off.
A magus may also teach someone his abbreviations, by spending a season writing Laboratory Texts with that person present, and explaining the abbreviations. In that case, the student counts as understanding Laboratory Texts by that magus with a level up to the teacher’s Latin x 20.
2 Likes
I think it is clear that unGifted scribes can copy translated texts. As for translation, it is clear from the material on the Cipher of Trianoma that a magus's shorthand can be taught. There seems to be no logical reason why it cannot be taught to an unGifted person with Magic Theory, and therefore no logical reason why they cannot then translate lab texts from a known shorthand.
1 Like
So, this isn't so much me answering, as poking at a framework toward answering.
Let us treat "Translate [Given Magus]'s Lab Texts" as a virtual ability, where your score in the ability equals the level of the effect you can effectively translate.
Everybody has "Translate My Own Lab Texts" ∞.
A maga can gain levels in "Translate [Given Magus]'s Lab Texts" with a season of lab activity, gaining levels equal to her own Lab Total up to a maximum of the level of the lab text studied. After she gains a given level in this virtual ability, she can translate any of [Given Magus]'s lab texts of that level or lower forever. The maga only ever needs to repeat this lab activity if and when she runs into a lab text of [Given Magus] with a level that exceeds her level in this virtual ability. Thus, under the current rules, using this virtual ability is not itself a lab activity, only gaining it is.
In theory, then, it seems like someone should be able to transmit their knowledge of "Translate My Own Lab Texts" to someone else through teaching them, or writing a book on the subject, or even possibly that someone should be able to gain knowledge of how to do it by exposure.
Someone who gained levels in the virtual ability "Translate [Given Magus]'s Lab Texts" by one of these other routes should then be able to translate lab texts of that level or lower without needing to engage in lab activity or generate a Lab Total.
3 Likes
I think the annoying nature of translating lab texts can be an important factor in keeping the OoH the way it is depicted: a collection of many individuals, often reclusive, where Mystery Cults (and -Houses), Jerbiton Leagues, Tytalus Cabals, Tremere Vexillations , Flambeau milites, Meretina micro-fractions, Verditius Fraternities, Bjornaer Septs and whatever I have missed flourish.
As users of the internet we are probably inclined to think of knowledge exchange as a natural, easy, desirable concept, but it would suit my personal idea of the setting better, if most magi shy away from doing so. It suits the unique status of House Bonisagus as well.
Now, why does that matter:
For most magi/covenants, the services of a scribe or two are an absolutely negligible expense, whereas translated Lab Texts could be used as currency to acquire (for example) Lab Texts that one desires. But that might make it more difficult to justify the more insular nature of magi/covenants. If it takes a magus valuable research-/crafting-/leisure-time to do so, they are inherently disincentivised to just translate any and all texts, supporting my preferred interpretation of the setting.
That is why I believe, mundanes should not (or at least only at great effort) be able to translate lab texts.
3 Likes
I agree that mundane scribes should be able to copy already translated lab texts. It is after all very similar to copying summae or tractati on the Arts, and just like copying those it would require a score in Magic Theory. It is not all that clear from the rules that they can do it though.
Decoding a magus' system for lab texts should not be possible unless you actually know the hermetic arts - the decoding process requires some magical experimentation to figure out what the writer meant with certain abbreviations.
Once they do know the pecularities of a given mage's writing, even a mundane scribe should be able to translate/write out their texts in clear.
Question then is how to learn the decoding, if they can't figure it out on their own. There is no logical reason why someone who already knows how to decode that magus' writing can't teach it to someone else, so remains to figure out the game mechanics for that.
4 Likes
It has been well established, that copying without any understanding or ability to practice magic is possible - the need for MT of 1 is only to prevent mistake.
However, I believe translating short-handed notes to proper labtext should remain in the area of lab activity:
- more opportunity for adventure's seed: hard-to-read notebook might be traded by mundanes (after being acquired through various shady ways), thinking there is some hidden secrets, kept for a long time, until a mage/redcap retrieve them, cover with scribbles.
- it could explain why some of the best mages might not have left a well-documented legacy: too hard to decipher, especially if coupled with a flaw like Incomprehensible, or Magical memory.
- translating notes is a seasonal activity, and a mage will only spend the time if it can benefit him, like getting recognition from published work. It is easy to see why some mages would not bother doing that, between jealousy not to share their "unique, new ability" or procrastination (next season I swear, I just need to distill vis, then to enchant that, then... oh my, my, my, I was forgetting my Longevity potion, etc.).
Flavour reason ?
Inventing a spell is clearly not a pure thought exercise: a lab is needed, implying that the mage proceed through trials and errors, with various incantation, mental exercises and what-not (in fact, it is largely left to the player to imagine what means a season of work to invent a spell).
Any other lab activity (enchanting, opening of items, etc.) is even more an hand-on activity.
So I picture in my mind, that a mage translating notes from another mage is "validating" his translation by doing a serie of small tests in his lab to make sure of the accuracy of his translationb's work.
1 Like
My 2 cents:
I don't think the whole shorthand and need for translation concept adds much value to the game. It either forces mages (if ungifted can't translate) to spend seasons in the lab which, at least in my troupe, doesn't promote a lot of role playing, or (if ungifted can translate) the cost of doing so becomes negligible. I understand that Ars Magica is a simulating rule system but there are limits and I believe that each rule should add more value than complexity to the table
In my saga I assume that anyone with magic theory can read lab notes and if I for some reason want a story hook that involves hard to read notebooks I just state that they are written in code and it becomes a story to find the cipher.
Note that I still require scribes to write books that are to be sold. No one wants to pay for a sloppy copy of a notebook.
2 Likes
There are still social reasons within the Order for insularity as well - some (most?) magi view knowledge as power, to be hoarded and protected, and the Mystery Cults don't share their secrets and may take a dim view of people poking at them. So, simply because its possible to teach someone else your shorthand to free the knowledge, doesn't mean that you do. Some will, of course, and may gain power by sharing. And that's an interesting story from either end.
What it does mean is that the work of dead magi is more likely to survive and spread, at least if its interesting. Someone has to do the initial translation, but then they can hand the job off to a mundane scribe, and come back in five years to a stack of translated lab notes and see what is worth having. And it probably means that there's a book floating round with examples of the shorthands of the Founders (or as many as the writer could find examples of), just in case any of their lost magical secrets show up. Or, alternatively, if the possibility of wider sharing means people guard their treasures more carefully, there'll be magi going through the dusty archives of old Covenants, looking for forgotten lab texts by powerful magi, in the hope of translating them and getting a key to unlock some other power.
3 Likes
I don't really see how dead magi's work remaining is contingent on mundanes doing the work.
If anything this change results in magi spending less time dealing with a predecessors remains, because they pawn off the work asap.
Having mundane scribes doing the busywork would also probably mean that there is hardly a magus' stuff remaining untranslated. Most any mage will have something that is worth a mundane scribes time.
We should probably see a lot less of "digging through forgotten archives" then, because why archive if you can just translate and use?
A couple of reflections, in no particular order:
- I think you should be able to learn someone's shorthand as part of another season, rather than a season merely being taught a magi's shorthand. For example, an apprentice could learn his mentor's shorthand as part of either a lab season, or a teaching season (typically magic theory).
- My experience is the difficulty of learning the shorthand with a limit level is a significant obstacle to learning the shorthand being at all interesting. I find collecting a dead magi's lab notes is a lot more relevant in games where you have a spring covenant and you're trying to build up resources. The rules are not entirely clear in whether you know TechForm and level of the labnotes you're trying to decipher. If you don't know what you're working from, you could waste your season trying something much higher level than you, or in the wrong techform. Even if you know it, being able to then decode up to labtext's level before trying again on higher lab text makes decoding potentially prohibitive, and more likely for the player to simply ignore it unless he's looking for something specific based on story. The reality is that a labtext's primary use, unless it's related to a breakthrough, is saving you time. If you require as much time decoding it as you would reinventing the spell - you probably should have just reinvented the spell. And it's rarely the low level spells you want to get from a mage's personal notes - it's the unique spells that are high level. My preference is requiring no more than a season decoding notes, unless there's a specific reason why a magi's note would be more complex than that - e.g. enchantments blurring script, or someone who intentionally codes his notes in several languages.
- Incidentally, if you were considering allowing mundanes to code-break, I think a skill check would probably be the best mechanics to replace a lab total. Artes Liberales, Enigmatic Wisdom and Magic Theory would all make sense to break a code.
5 Likes
There are good arguments on both sides, so I'm going to do another poll to get the balance of opinion on the core question.
Should unGifted scribes be able to translate Laboratory Texts, if someone else has taught them the key?
- Yes
- No
0
voters
2 Likes
I would like to offer an addendum to my above suggestion:
If one magus translates another magus's works, and then translates their own lab notes on doing so, then using those lab notes to learn to translate the initial magus' notes should require an artes Liberales philosophical labwork to understand and utilize.
This keeps the translation ability rare and difficult with having it be impossible for mundane scholars to learn.