There is no hard reason why we should limit this. The spell/device is useful to avoid the relatively small inconvenience of waiting for the book to be available if someone else is useing it. There are plenty of magic that is built specifically to solve inconveniences like that. If you want a way to limit it, personally I would go with: only 1 such effect can affect a book at one time, otherwise the magics interfere with each other. So it would allow 2 people to study from the same book, but no more. Just like a copy would, in short. Doesn't break the setting nor the system.
There is a price for using this effect: Warping. If someone uses the spell as written, he causes warping on the book. That's 1 point per casting, so 80 point in a season for the Sun version for a Warping score of 5 after a single season! That would quickly become unacceptable to magi. An enchanted item (or a D:Month variant of the spell) would cause less warping, but needs time/vis to invent/enchant. And even the lesser warping would probably be deemed unacceptable for the most valuable books. Magi would know that, so this would be used only for the less valuable books. The first time we notice a book being Warped, we'll ask question and possibly ban the use of the effect on some (or even all) of our books. Again, this doesn't break the setting, nor the system.
I'm not sure sure warping affects the book.
Much like I don't believe the recipient of The Incantation of Lighting or Ball of Abysmal Flame doesn't inflict warping on the recipient, I don't think this really should inflict warping on the book. It's the Target, target argument. If it warps the book, it should probably warp the mirrors. If the magic can be interfered with by another person attempting to reproduce the same effect, why not when someone actually uses the book?
I'm basically done, I'm following my own rule, and am considering myself over-ruled, unless Archimedes comes in on my side. If he stays mum, it's fine. I'm not convinced, but I'm clearly over-ruled pending Archimedes feelings on the matter.
Just figure out exactly how it works, what the limits are (and there should be some, perhaps as you described, perhaps including warping, etc).
He argues that resource congestion is unlikely to be a problem - there is a single book he thinks might be a problem, and we could just copy that.
I hope I made that point as well, though it was undoubtably burried deep in that horrible wall of text.
When I picked this mirror, it served several purposes:
A) I like the spell, but do not use it often (because I SG much more than I play).
B) It filled just the right amount of points
C) With this device, I could simply sidestep any elements of resource congestion, which has never been much of an issue in games I've played/run in the 5th edition anyway. An example of a Bonisagian "must solve it with magic" overkill solution.
Alternatively, I can re-spend my private points once again.
No promises on when that can be done - it was hard enough the first time.
I keep feeling you're seeing an issue where there is none, and insist that it is a very important principle.
I find the reference to teaching most curious - I've seen teaching used more in the 5th edition than in any earlier edition, despite the existence of this spell, and our general lack of resource congestion since the 3rd edition.
I see potential for abuse, especially in light of how I see warping, and this may not warp the book, unless there's consensus about that, too. It's a slippery slope, a possible avalanche, so I am passionate.
Quite simply, because this effect does what Teaching cannot, and it does it better. It allows two people to learn from one source. That is otherwise impossible for Arts. Further, Teaching requires some amount of effort (sacrifice) on the part of the Teacher, in that the teacher doesn't learn his material while he's teaching, the student's do. He gets exposure to teaching, or perhaps the material or the language, but that's not much. And then, there isn't any penalty to learning when two people use this effect to study from a book. It makes a resource less scarce. Consider the Bonisagus who takes two apprentices simultaneously, and then just sits them in front of books with these devices, flaunting the requirement that he teach each student once per year. Are apprentices really going to complain that they aren't being taught individually? Are his covenant sodales going to take him to Tribunal and claim he isn't teaching them? How would they really know? Have them read, and then use them in the lab for three seasons, it's tough to say what is really going on in his sanctum.
It's a cosmological shift, unless this device has some really powerful restrictions. Warping is one, simultaneous access is another.
Warping...is a key part of the discussion, and why I believe it doesn't affect the book is because of the following description of warping:
So, is the book affected? IMO, no. The mirrors, perhaps are affected.
Are those within the area of effect of a 6th magnitude (or greater) Aegis affected? Again, no, although it could be argued they are affected whenever a spell from outside is resisted or weakened by the Aegis, but that's a bit of a stretch for me to get there, it's more like the example in the same paragraph, characters living in a flying castle. Or you can go to the next paragraph where it just flat out excepts Aegis of the Hearth.
The Incantation of Lightning and Ball of Abysmal Flame fall within that realm of Brief Effect and High Power, and they are indeed affected by the effect, but really, those two spells, the Warping is incidental to the purpose of the spell. And, IMO, the Warping should affect the Target, not the target, or perhaps the vessel which holds the magic, but in this case, those are very brief and temporary effects, and warping is moot in this case.
Same with Hermes Portal and the like, technically people moving through the portal are affected, because they are relocated from point A to point B, but we have discussed that Portals are superior to spells like Leap of Homecoming or spells using that base with alternative Targets/Ranges (Touch range, Group targets) which would inflict warping...
I dunno, it's something that probably needs to be discussed more in depth.
My interpetation (for what it's worth) that a spell like Eternal Repetition of the Bottomless Pool is quite different from something like Ball of Abysmal Flame, in that the actual target of the spell is the book. The spell creates an image of the book, effect establishing a link to it via an Arcane Connection. Without that connection, there can be no image.
See this in the same way as you would see a spell such as Haunt of the Living Ghost CrIm(In) 35, which allows you to project an image of you to a distant location.
(Let's ignore for the moment that thi spell is R:Per, and that the magus would invent it to be attuned to him. Say this is a R:Touch variant.)
In that case, you are not affecting the individual himself -- you are creating an image of him. Yet, the spell is affecting that person, in my opinion. You can't cast the spell without having a "source" person for the image: that makes him the Target of the spell because you need him to cast the spell. So he would suffer Warping from such a casting.
Same thing for the book. As the source of the image (through the AC) it is the actual Target.
Then so does a scribe. We have 1 copy of a book. We use a scribe for 1-2 seasons, we now have 2 (or more) copies of the same book.
If those 1-2 seasons make all the difference to you... I'm sorry, I don't see how.
As mentioned... not exactly.
Can I assume you also disavow p. 101-102 of covenants?
Cow and Calf. The owner of the book owns all copies. He finds out you've made a copy and then sells it, to his benefit and your loss.
Disavow is a strong word, when it is specifically written: "[...] the alternatives are presented here for consideration." Considering they haven't been presented in this saga, for consideration and use by the PCs, I'm saying that they aren't pertinent to the discussion.
Also, the SQs on this have a tendency to be lower than books and they are much more ephemeral than books, too. How often does a dragon egg hatch? Who acquired it? What SQ is attached to it?
Realia, specifically can be studied by multiple magi at one time, but it must be divided up, and the corresponding source quality lessened.
Not quite correct. One cannot sell or give a copy, but still own that copy in full:
[/quote]
But Great Works can have higher Quality than books (no bonus for scribing/binding/illumination but tripple bonus for resonnant materials and clarification), and by their nature (they are quite large) can probably be used by more than one magus at a time.
I could have sworn that's what it said too, but it isn't.
According to Covenants, p. 95 (first column, top), he owns the right to distribution, meaning you cannot sell your copies, nor give them away.
He does not actually own your copies. Even if he did, so what?
Emphasis new.
I really should have sub-divided that wall-of-text and put in headers, eh?
Meeh. It doesn't prevent the abuse of the effect if another item like that is introduced in the saga.
Personally, I like the Warping of the books better. Making the item use D:Conc (-1 magnitude) and have the item maintains concentration (+5 levels) produces the same effect but with less Warping.
This would give you the equivalent of a "Constant Effect, High Power" (ArM5 p.168), so 1 point when cast + 1 point/season + 1 point/year. So after 4 seasons of using it on a book, effects would begin to show (5 points = Warping Score of 1).
The first Flaw related to Warping would, IMO, make mundane scribes incapable of copying the book. Specifics would depend on the subject of the book.
I was wondering - how do we approach the matter of familiars?
How hard do we see it as finding and befriending one?
My home table(s) tend to go with the following:
5th edition favours familiars.
It is much easier to bind a familiar that ever before - no need for a high score in Animal, and the cords need not be tied using Intelligo or Mentem.
And famliars are cool - so we encourage them!
So it was decided (without much debate) to make familiars easy to find. Sort of.
Basically, finding an animal touche by magic isn't all that hard. If (as a player) you just want a familiar, nothing fancy, it's easy enough to find and bind.
It probably doesn't have much in the way of a Might Score and certainly has few if any powers, but it bears enough magic to become a familiar.
Expect them to have cunning though, and so have Intelligence -3 when they have been bound. This is easy.
Or, you can bind a creature met in a story. These are more likely to have Intelligence, Might scores and possibly even powers.
But! They require a story, and might well be harder to befriend.
I agree that finding a familiar shouldn't be too hard. But it depends on a number of factors, like the power of the familiar. It also becomes more difficult if the magus goes looking for a specific type of magical creature (like a drake or a basilisk).
And finding the creature is not the same as befriending it. Sometimes, the magus and the animal are simply not compatible.
Just throwing some numbers... I would say that it is not just a matter of spending a season to find exactly what you are looking for. Make it some kind of roll, based on Perception + any appropriate Ability. The higher the result, the closer to what the magus was looking for (or the more powerful/intelligent) the creature is. Say... an ease factor of 15 to find exactly what you were looking for, with 12 you find something fairly close, 9 close enough, 6 something different. Below that, you didn't find a suitable creature, and on a Botch you encountered an inimical creature. That would be for a grog-level magical creature. For a companion-level creature, add 3 to the ease factor.
This is just a guideline, we can adjust the results based on the actual story and parameters of the search.
Moving the question here, I think it's a better place to discuss it.
The player describes what the character is doing, and what he thinks will be the likely result, based on ArM5 pp.163-166. Troupe can comment or suggest variations on the result at any time. But in the end, we are each adults trying to tell the story about our own characters, so it's up to us to decide the actual result. At least, that's how I understand the basis of the experimental saga.
For example, the two seasons during which Praxiteles is handling steward duties. What I wrote previously was a suggestion of what this could mean -- either exposure in some social Abilities, or perhaps some form of training if Laurent is more involved. So Jonathan could adjust his description for these two seasons, to say for example that Praxiteles works with Laurent the first season, to receive some training in Profession: Steward (and that 8 xp would be gained) while receiving exposure in Leadership on the second season (2 xp). Note that this is just en example, JL can decide the actual result. But if he were to say that the teaching resulted in 12 xp, some of us would probably say "Hey, that seems awfully high! How come Laurent has a score of 9 in Profession: Steward?" and he could go "Well, I've decided to fully stat him up and give him a score of 7 as well as Puissant in Profession: Steward. And here's the quick background that explains why."
Same thing with the stories. For example, at the end of "The Lost Summa" I'll write down what I expect Petronius to have learned over that story. As it's a season-long thing I will probably suggest that he got about 10 xp, but perhaps a bit less because it wasn't that intense -- lots of traveling around but nothing especially exciting. So something like 5 xp in Survival for the traveling around with the grogs, 1 xp in Leadership, 1 xp in Area Lore: Limburg and 2 xp in Finesse (for example). The troupe nods, or someone suggests "You could have put xp in such-and-such Ability instead." After that, I update my magus' stats and we move on.
Does that makes sense? That's just my feeling of how this saga is supposed to work -- each player does the largest part of the work for his own characters, and provides input to the others to help make things more interesting.
How should I handle xp for Rufus (Petronius' magical animal companion) before the saga start? As per RoP:M, it would be basically impossibler for him to improve at all, unless he gets his paws on a pawn of vis.
I'm fine with this, since this gives him a reason to want to become Petronius' familiar.
Once he becomes a familiar, am I correct in thinking that advancement would then be as a normal character?
Yeah, I think the vis is needed before he's a familiar.
And yes, advancement as normal once he is a familiar. I've always hated that rule, or felt it was incomplete.
It's a slippery slope, a possible avalanche, so I am passionate.
(Praxiteles goes off muttering something about beating and joining...)