The heavier stuff now:
Verditius Items of Quality
I like them. Its a process that you magically treat an item to make it ideal, non magical. They arent resisted and they can be enchanted. The vis spent is for the process not an enchantment. However:
a)pg 124 '...the empowered item of quality provides a bonus to the user's roll when it is used...'. Soak is not a roll, damage is not a roll. Just to be clear.
b) I am inclined to rule that because of the use of Verditius runes, if you want to further enchant the item, you can't use more Verditius runes (but can enchant it through normal procedure). Discuss?
c) All crafted items provide arcane connections. Invested devices are for years, non-magical ones are for weeks. Because of the process and runes, Items of qualities are for months. Sounds fair?
I will allow Graham to start with Items of Quality virtue , contrary to character guidelines. This is because it serves ST purposes. I like Hubris flaws. Hubris is a very, very dangerous thing to have in Greece....
Criamon
As a player, I too don't like how the Criamon are represented in the official book. As an ST, I do not have the inclination to throw out a quarter of a canon book, nor the time to replace it with something else. Moreover, as an ST Criamon as written give a lot of hooks I can use. I respect your opinion T Rex, but I am keeping them as are for this campaign. Its fine if you dont like them... play a mystic from a different house or tradition, or play a Gorgiastic. Are we ok with this?
Ok, lets parse this out.
Whats this about Tempestria not being modified?
Witches of Thessaly aren't infernal. In fact the hermetic part broke from Daughters of Erictho just for that. However, Summoning is described in Infernal, can be used to summon Demons, 'smells' unholy, and the witches keep contact with their non-Hermetic sisters and trade secrets (like cthonic magic), even if they say they don't. Summonings for other realms do exist, see Hermetic Sahirs for an example. What is the problem with this, please explain.
There is a misconception here: social outcasts arent rejected; unplayable characters will be rejected. The Binsagus example I gave was exactly that: a player dumping points on social to make a genius labrat. However that labrat is very difficult to take out in quests and engage in storylines. After missing the first couple of outings and interactions, the player might very likely get bored and complain that the ST doesn't pay attention to him (the ST though has to pay attention to the other 7 players too). I am fine with an anti-social character provided: a) she participates in quests/plots/storylines b)knows the risks of being antisocial c) is antisocial as a character, and that does not spill over in player interactions.
I agree its not solely the players job to make the character fit. Its not solely the STs. Which is why we are having this conversation. As I posted in the character creation thread: find a reason to join, then make the character. Don't try to shoe-horn an existing concept into this campaign.
Why would just out of Gauntlet join this 'dinky' covenant:
-[tab][/tab]Spring covenants means no seniority and more equal distribution of materials and vis. Joining an established covenant does much to curb the momentum of younger members.
-[tab][/tab]Aura of 5. For a new covenant thats a lot. This especially critical for researchers and crafters.
-[tab][/tab]Seclusion. So people need quiet, others just need to disappear for a while. Add to that the Ungoverned, means no Lord over their head.
-[tab][/tab]Steady vis supply. The Theban Tribunal has a lot of vis supplies (especially Creo/Vim). That apple Anastaj parades is a whole Rook of Mentem, and thats impressive.
-[tab][/tab]The Theban Tribunal has few disputes between members, and fewer raids between covenants. It's more stable than Iberia, Loch Legan or Stonehedge , and less oppressive than Transilvania, the Alps or the Rhine.
Those are some reasons. Ultimately though, its a player decision. We good?