In terms of style, for me I don't find copying books, whether they're Arts or Laboratory Texts, to be something very mage-like. It feels like grunt-work to be handed off to others. Besides which, if the mundanes cannot copy such a book, how is it they can illuminate such a book? And if that should we rule out binding it? At that point do lots of our magi need to pick up the ability to scribe, illuminate, and bind? That all feels like the busywork grogs can do to free up the magi to do more interesting things.
8 Likes
If anyone wants mundanes to try and decode laboratory texts without knowing the key (or rules to do so without using lab totals), it might be useful to consider the case of decoding Trianoma's Cipher, which is based off of one particular laboratory shorthand. On page 21 of Houses of Hermes: True Lineages, there are rules for decoding a note written in this shorthand: Int + Latin + stress die vs 6 + author's Communication + Intrigue. You could potentially use them as a base for rules for intellectually decoding a lab text, without experimentally verifying it. Of course, attempting to use such a lab-text without engaging in experimental verification might not be the safest course of action...
2 Likes
Which does make me wonder why the decoding lab text isn't based on those rules, yes...
They aren't for decoding Laboratory Texts, and they don't fit into the seasonal structure that the process generally does. It would add the wrong sort of complexity, in my opinion.
Because the decoding lab tex rules go back several editions, while the Trianoma's Cipher was introduced in this edition (IIRC) would be my guess.
1 Like
But there is a major difference between decoding a lab text and decoding a letter. Part of decoding is identifying what has been encoded. If it's a letter, that is just regular language with theoretically recognizable structure. If it's a whole Hermetic lab notebook, that's quite a different thing. There is no reason to suppose decoding both would work the same way.
1 Like
Also a Hermetic notebook hasn't been made intentionally obscure, it is just unique shorthand.
2 Likes
Furthermore, the shorthand does not necessarily have a one-to-one mapping to translated text. There may not be a key which allows translation, and the text may not be complete without the background knowledge of the author, because they were only intended for their own use.
I imagine the translator will have to use their magic to test tentative understandings of the text, even if they have previously translated other more advanced texts, because the shorthand is incomplete and/or varying over time.
However, my reason for being restrictive is to slow down advancement. I think copying and distribution of magic texts is already too easy, resulting in some over-powering of most sagas. Disallowing mundane scribes from translating lab texts help a little.
Yeah, it wouldn't be a perfect fit for sure. Still, there is something unsatisfying to how the magi decoding another magi's shorthand works.
By the written rules once you have translated a more advanced text then you can translate the less advanced text without a lab activity. Which fits because once you realize that MA-P means Mercury Ascendant in Pisces you can pretty well guess what MA-V means. It seems to me that translated lab notes of the lab which allowed you to translate the more advanced text could be used by anyone to translate a less advanced text.
1 Like