I would think this very much depends on the nature of the boundary and the spells involved, obviously, yet if it is true that it would work that way it is an interesting thing to consider. Is this take on how "container" targets work something that went into errata?
A lot depends on the nature of a given boundary. But for the sake of argument I think we could easily grant that at least "some" formulaic spells of the right type could severely damage if perhaps even completely negate "some" things that would qualify as a Boundary before their effects.
I suppose examples could be developed that could portray that either ending or maintaining an effect until the end of its Duration either way in either a positive or negative light. There are so many potential examples it seems like something difficult to approach completely evenly and consistently. Which is annoying. I by far prefer consistency. (I'm looking at you Perdo.)
On the one hand I have trouble devising a reason why, say, burning down a forest that is being used as a Boundary Target shouldn't negate some magical effect that was placed on the forest. Yet how much is sufficient to consider a Boundary no longer an effective demarcation for magical purposes. If I fire catapults at your wall until it has a hole in it, have I negated the Boundary and forced your Aegis to drop? What if I create water until the lake surrounding the island your Covenant is on (ahem) begins to flood over the island? Do you no longer have a Boundary? Neither of the latter examples feels intuitively right to me.
Regardless I don't think it really affects the consideration of direct conflict between Formulaic vs. Ritual Magic. Negating the physical Boundary (or Room, or Circle etc.) is making an end run around the issue, not resolving it, in my estimation. My rational intuition is that Ritual Magic "should" be more powerful than Formulaic Magic, and this is under represented in the rules as they stand. I would additionally posit that this devalues a variety of Ritual Magic uses as things to spend your vis on.
That citation, which I mentioned previously in the thread I might add, doesn't mean that they are not magical effects. The exception and what makes it notable is that those are two magical effects that very particularly do not cause warping despite continual use and affecting their targets. That is what makes them exceptions. It doesn't prove your point, it directly disproves it.
Granted I think this is, what, the third time we have disagreed on this topic and gone over the same points? I think we can accept that we disagree, hopefully amicably.
The two arguments have a very different structure and your comparison is inapt.
A caster generates a casting total when attempting to create a magical effect, and then succeeds or fails. After which the effect has a penetration value for how effective it is. To penalize the casting total a magical effect has to directly affect the caster, penetrate, and inflict the casting penalty on their actions as a character. This includes Aegis. You are standing in a Room Target effect that inflicts casting penalties? It doesn't matter unless it penetrates. The effect must affect the Character in order to modify the casting total that they generate as they attempt actions. A given spell literally isn't the target, or even an appropriate target, for that effect.
Whereas it seems trivially obvious that effects that modify the encumbrance value of objects by negating/mitigating weight literally do and should target said objects.
This is not a unique property of the Hibernian Tribunal or its Peripheral Code.
Now arguably this would be considered a more provocative action in some Tribunals in comparison with others, but it is legal everywhere. Declaring war on an entire Covenant in the Rhine, with entanglements with multiple Gilds likely a direct result, would likely be unwise. But legal. The Rhine hasn't, and can't, outlaw Wizard War. But they have made it prohibitive to engage in very effectively by the political balkanization of Gilds and using them as defense pacts.
Removing the Hearth's Keystone (HP, pg 94) is an example of a RAW Aegis dispel that dispels at effect level + 15 levels and is designed (as I mentioned earlier in the thread) to be dropped through an Intangible Tunnel. So if we imagine, just for sake of argument, pushing that to the maximum non-Ritual value of 45 it would still dispel up to level 60. In order to force conversion to a Ritual you therefore would need a minimum of an Aegis level of 65.
I don't believe this qualifies as "not too difficult" for most Covenants, especially any lacking a Vim specialist.
At least 3 pawns cheaper, since the dispel reaches up 3 magnitudes + die roll. So on that we very much agree. Even more cheaply if a ritual is not required at all for the dispel. It places the efficiency on the side of offense.
Interesting point. Perhaps that would be a reason to consider protecting more than just an immediate environment/fortress of the Covenant for magical strategy purposes. Protecting everything "within your Boundary" in order to make it harder to undermine the definition of your Boundary in magical terms.
Very unlikely without vast amounts of Vis as Rituals has minimum level of 20, and it is very hard to get Spotaneous casting total high enough to dispel rituals. Agaisnt Aegis it is almost impossible, as you ahve to get Penetration bypass the Aegis, and with spontaneous casting total it is very hard. With 25 spell on 35 Aegis you need Casting total of 120 - twice the Penetration score to penetrate Aegis to affect Level 35 Aegis. '
It takes a lot of word-twisting to read the ArM5 text that way. Note that the text on ArM5, p.101 does not say that the ritual "fails", or that the focus "reactivates" it. No. It says that researching a longevity ritual culminates in the development of a repeatable focus action (such as drinking a potion, taking a bath, or standing in a purifying flame - never an object) whose effects last until the first aging crisis; then the focus action can be repeated, and the text specifically describes such repetition as "performing the ritual from the old ritual again".
So, a dispelled longevity ritual can be repeated - and in fact, a non-dispelled longevity ritual that stops working at the first aging crisis cannot leave something behind "to be reactivated", or such "leftover" magic would warp the recipient.
The spontaneous casting issue is really just relevant for the Diedne war where they all could spont on day 1 a level 25 PeVi. Could easilly grab a +4 AC connection to the Aegis boundary for a +5 multiplyer. They also easilly could muster a +5 sympathic multiplyer. They were masters of ceremony and had good artes (4) but even better philo (6) and normal penetration skill (4) So we get:
Penetration (4) x 10 (AC + Sympathetic) = +40
Vis (20) = +40
Merits such as life linked which I find to be druidic themed adds another +20
Aura: +5
Ceremonial: +10
Total: 115 + stress die
You could push for a bit more Arts which are currently set at about 15 in each Pe/Vi
Push for a bit more vis
Push for a little bit more Penetration skill
But with one season, any magus can make it a formulaic, adding 25+ to the above penetration total plus wizard communion plus mastery in penetration allowing the killing of any Aegis relatively easy for any group of 3+ magi. At this point, the Aegis gives you one extra round of defense, a few seconds, so that you are not totally surprised you are being attacked.
As far as I'm aware, the whole container thing has not shown up in the errata. However, the term "container" for targets has shown up in the errata, so the idea of container targets has hit the errata and maybe there will be more later.
Hmm... He did say that, and I'm wrong about what he said here. But I'm pretty sure I read something that said the Aegis would go down. What confuses me here is that he's using my pre-container argument which was an interpretation to solve the pre-container issue, but using it post-container. Also, the container movement thing doesn't look right since we have canonical containers of both types moving. I'm going to have to dig deeper and for the moment accept that destroying the AotH boundary doesn't end it. Sorry.
AoH is vulnerable to magi with an emphasis on PeVi who have either spent seasons learning to knock Aegises down, or who are implausibly focused spont specialists. The implausibly focused spont specialists are not realistic threats — that's "an angel comes and knocks it down" territory. No-one sensible spends time worrying about it. Magi in the first category are probably quite rare — why would you waste time learning such a spell? If you can get a high enough Penetration to take the Aegis down, you can get a high enough Penetration to blast straight through it, and don't need to take it down. An Aegis-smasher is a spell you can only cast if you have declared Wizard's War on a whole covenant, or want to be Marched. (It's a clear Code violation, and every other magus in the Tribunal will want to set a precedent.) High Penetration castle destroyers do have other uses.
And, of course, most supernatural creatures cannot dispel Hermetic magic, and will be kept out of the Aegis in any case.
Aegis is clearly extremely useful, but it is not invulnerable. From a story perspective, that's exactly what we want.
(Incidentally, that statement about wards all being type one did not make it through all the discussions of static and dynamic targets.)
Your "can easily" is not true. A character designed for that dying for it literally could possibly do it. One important mistake you have there: the spell fizzles if it does not get casting total of 50. And you cannot use more Vis than you have Arts. Ceremonial casting also means the Covenant guards can spot the DIedne during casting and poking a ceremonial caster with pionty sticks is a very bad thing. If the spell is done at Arcane conenction range it owuld be 10 levels higher. And life linked ceremonial magic is very hazardous as failing the casting total means you gain extra fatigue levels meaning th the spell botches due losign consciousness due life linked magic damage.
I disagree getting +5 multiplier for the boundary of the Aegis being easy to get. It requires permanent Arcane connection to the path, not something along the path. Getting permanent Arcane connections is not easy as you have to know the boundary.
You can obtain a second (and third, etc.) Major Hermetic Virtue during play through Mystery Initiations or Twilight experiences just to name the two most common ways.
But then that character is an experienced magus unlike you state. I know it is hard to discuss with facts when you have an agenda, but please, keep your facts straight. Moving the goal is a very bad argumentation and loses your credibility.
Out of Gauntlet magus with Wards Major Focus has better chance doing what you described with FOrmulaic SPell than Diedne. IT still rquries very specific built, but computer gamers think a svery specific build si a common case. It is not. It is a very specific build designed to knock out an Aegis if the guards of the covenant are lax. Please, in Ars setting, do not paly like DnD player thinking the setting is passive until the character does something. It is a really bad habit DnD teaches to everyone playing it. You assumed the DIedne can cast spell with spell casting words heard at the boundary of the Aegis with Voice range spell, and nobody notices it while he is dancing with gesures for 15 minutes per magnitude - that is 1 hour 15 mintues with 25th level spell. And that spell casting requires several Concentration checks due time unless the "out of the character generation" character has Concentration of 5 (or 4 with Long Term speciality).
My appologies. I mixed Life linked & Life boost. Both virtues I find to be Diedne theme friendly but the 1st that does help with spontaneous magic is a major hermetic which as Erik stated would have to be initiated and hence a rare find, even at a journeyman levels. The 2nd, equally powerful to add to penetration totals , is a minor hermetic but for formulaic effects.
Still, even if a young typical Diedne has trouble bringing down mid level Aegis on a spontaneous fiat I think we can agree that with one season to learn a formulaic, pretty much any magi can.
David confirms this is the intended "story enabler" sweet spot that is being aimed.
About getting a chunk of rock of an Aegis boundary being difficult... where any creature or supernatural person feels a tingle when they are about to enter the boundary & is most often designed to be evident. I dare you to find an easier AC to seize. I admit it would take another season to fix it to elevate it from decades duration to Indefinite.
Made me laugh there where Erik being accused of being a scroundrel. A petty theif in the night looking for a quick score of having an extra major hermetic virtue. Careful for you do not yet seem to know the secret societies this forum harbors. Erik belonging to one of the eldest casts of the wise Ash Oaks with numerous deeds of fair judgements if not a bit conservative ones.
All is now fine. We managed to force The David to appear so he may answer what we all knew he would in his ever seeking of the better story.
Still let us shed a tear for Notatus who's lifetime research failed to elevate his magic beyond the reach of formulaic magics.
I concur with this. (I think it should take Vis being the only exception.)
The fact that an Aegis can be brought down, and especially that bringing it down is not that difficult for the right Mage, means that the avoidance of open conflict like a Schism is something that must be achieved socially. Open magical war with your fellow Hermetic Magi is dangerous. It is the social cohesion of the Order, such as it is, that keeps the "Pax Hermetica" and not invulnerable magical defenses that everyone has.
This would be true if you can mange to declare wizard war against every member of the covenant 8at the same time*, there is a lack of specificity as to what happens when you try to declare a wizard war and the wizard you are declaring war on is not able to be reached, whether because they are off on adventure, stuck in twilight, or otherwise unavailable. Even if that is delayed it could result in the attack on the aegis being declared an unlawful deprivation of magic on whichever magus you were not in wizard war with at that time.
What the Hibernian tribunal has that is unique enduring wizard wars that are declared against groups like a covenant instead of requiring individual notification.
Conclusion is that it does not take a ritual effect to bring down a ritual effect but there are a number of other effects that need to be ritual to affect a ritual.
MoH p.102 - A Day's Grace - The suppressed spell can have a level up to 25 and may be Spontaneous, Ceremonial or Formulaic. Ritual spells are too complex to be suppressed by this spell although should a version of this spell be designed as a Ritual that should be possible.
Corebook p.160 - MuVi Wizard's Boost - ... unless the Wizard's boost is a ritual
Should the limitations of them having to be rituals to affect rituals be removed in an errata?