Training as a Magi

Games Discussion Ars Magica
21

'Pre-opening' training is very much a legal risk on the part of the magus sponsoring it, at least in terms of 'someone else could steal my apprentice'. It's comparatively less of a risk, of course, for members of House Bonisagus, since they can invoke their rights if a member of another House claims the child as an apprentice.

I'd also note that the event cited in the sidebar on HoH:TL p.52 does make it very clear that technically the claiming magus has the right of it by the Code, but is primarily intended as a story hook! Claiming someone who is 'obviously' being prepared by another magi is a great way to start a conflict with said magi, and there are all sorts of ways such a thing could be resolved. While the sidebar tends to focus on the Tribunal politics side of the story, the mother of the child could also hire a famous Intangible Assassin to declare Wizard's War, or Certamen specialist for duel-style resolution, and so on. Claiming the grandson of a powerful archmaga as an apprentice when she really wants him is likely to not end well for you, technical rights or not!

I'd also note that the 'several years of intensive education before actually being formally adopted / having the Arts opened' is specifically noted as a common practice of House Tytalus in HoH:S. I would not be surprised if members of other Houses adopted some similar methods, especially if potential apprentices are noticed at an extremely young age. I see a lot of campaigns hand out additional 'apprenticeship' xp in one way or another, often intended to reflect this or simply intensive tutoring for the first few years before being more thoroughly used for lab work.

That said, I'm getting a little away from the core of the issue, which seems to be Practice-xp in Apprenticeship versus Exposure-xp. To me, RAI is pretty clear here: Any season spent doing 'lab work' - which includes Fixing Arcane Connections and Writing/Copying Laboratory Texts - grants only exposure XP. You can have the apprentice practice skills independently instead of doing lab work, but you can't have them do lab work and practice at the same time.

Note, however, that copying a pre-existing summa isn't lab work - a mundane scribe could do so as well - and would thus fit into the Practice rules for Profession (scribe).

22

copying may not be lab work, but it is work which can only gain in exposure experience, not practice.

23

Regarding this, I'd definitely call a couple of Verditius getting together to discuss the cult would be a Practice, and I would definitely say they can also count it as correspondence xp, though without someone scribing the debate it would be hard to bind it together for a Correspondence tractatus.

Regarding pre-opening training (Lots of debate so not really going to quote for it): I would definitely agree its a risk. As far as Tytalian magi doing extensive pre-training as a matter of course, that seems perfectly suited for them. Tytalus magi love the intrigue, and the idea of finding a gifted child, getting him four years of extensive training while trying to keep him hidden from other magi.. oh, that is their wheelhouse, isn't it? That sounds perfect for them. For everyone else, it depends on tribunal and on any magi involved. If you have a rival nearby who's causing trouble for you, then you are going to have a lot of difficulties trying to teach four years of Latin and Magic Theory to the little gifted girl you found without your rival kidnapping him and training him. This of course will to to Tribunal and cause story....

And back to the beginning topic: Ars Magica does seem to make a very firm stand on the difference between Free Seasons and Work Seasons. Poor folk get one free season a year, Common folk get two free seasons a year, wealthy get three, magi get four. The rest of the year they're considered to be 'working' for their livelihood. Most productive labwork for spell design and enchanting, I probably wouldn't allow the magus to use training for his apprentice, I could debate with the troupe regarding vis extracrtion (probably not) or binding arcane connections (more likely), and I think refining the lab or using Practicing in MT, I might allow it. If the magus HAD a once-gifted lab assistant already, who had magic theory, I would definitely allow that lab assistant to train the apprentice in MT during the seasons he's 'working'; Either way, I probably wouldn't allow the apprentice to add his totals to the parens during that season, because the apprentice is focused on learning rather than helping.

24

A Verditius magus enchanting devices for sale is not earning a living by his work? I did not see that one coming.

A lab rat master can easily benefit from giving the apprentice a season or two of training in Magic Theory, one top of the mandatory taught seasons once a year. To get maximum help in the lab, Magic Theory should be raised quickly. The new apprentice does not know Latin and does not read, so book learning comes later. Training gives less xp than teaching, but the master can do real work while he trains. Taking the apprentice along for training costs nothing, and it boosts future lab assistance.

I can see good reasons for not allowing Magic Theory by training, but such interpretation is very far from obvious by RAW.

25

Hi,

Magi do not earn a living doing any of this. They spend 0 seasons earning a living! These are activities done instead of earning a living.

So no.

Anyway,

Ken

26

[tab][/tab] My 2 cents :smiley:

''Master and apprentice do not need a common language...''

I would extrapolate that abilities based on language cannot be trained.

27

The Verditius mage uses a Craft skill in his enchanting, no?
I can see the Verditius apprentice being trained in the craft skill in this House-limited case.

28

He may do, but he will not always, typically because sometimes he wants to enchant something he cannot craft himself. He may either get somebody else to craft it, or use Verditius runes with all that goes with it (core rules).
But that is not the point. If he cannot train MT because he is not making a living, then he cannot train craft either, for the same reason. That reason is quite explicit in RAW.

Ionian's point, that MT cannot be trained because it requires language is reasonable, but RAW does not say that MT requires language, and it does not say that training never requires a common language either, only in most cases.

RAW made a point of excluding arts, but not any abilities. Why bother about excluding the arts if magi are excluded from training in any case?

It is a reasonable house rule to say that Magic Theory is not trainable, but RAW is ambiguous at best. If one does make house rules, one has to consider all other abiliities in the same process.

The case I had at hand, was a magus who has to set up shared labs as service to the covenant. This service part of the terms of the covenant, and in exchange for room and board, and all the other conveniences. Making a living in the usual use of the word. Training a grog while he does that, the grog could then go on and install features in the magus' own lab afterwards. I am queazy about the entire idea of illiterate, ungifted grogs doing specialist work on behalf of the magus, but it is quite clearly within RAW.

29

Note also it says that the person doing the training may earn a living, not must. The point is that they can use the ability while they train it.

30

Euh, no

31

An interesting point that implicitly came up here is that Bonisagus apprentices are likely to be better-trained before they become apprentices - as Bonisagus magi can train their apprentices in Latin and Magic theory with little fear of their proto-apprentices being snatched out from underneath them.

Of course, OTHER Bonisagus can bonisnatch other proto-bonisagus apprentices, but THAT can be resolved within House, as opposed to having to invoke Hermetic law. (And I would imagine that the House would take a dim view of other Bonisagus snatching the apprentices of other Bonisagus simply because they didn't want to bother going to find one of their own.)

32

Except that this sets up the odd scenario in which the amount of XP received by the apprentice is dependent on whether or not money exchanged hands via a 3rd party. Ie, if a poor covenant had to make and sell a magic item in a season in order to make rent, then an apprentice could receive training. But if the covenant were flush and the magi was making it for themselves or one of their sodales, then the apprentice wouldn't receive training XP.

...which seems a bit odd.

33

I thought that sentence was supposed to disallow training in an Ability only used a tiny bit as opposed to used over the whole season. For instance, if the master bargains for the price of a piece for one day and then spends the whole season crafting the piece, the Craft Ability used could be Trained while Bargain could not be.

34

I think the 'spirit' of that clause was about abilities actually used to gain a living (crafts and professions, but not abilities like awareness and concentration). But we like to nitpick so...

35

Bonisagus magi do not swear to release their apprentices to Bonisagus.

36

Yes, but the issue are proto-apprentices: ie, if a Bonisagus has a Gifted child, but is letting them be tutored for a few years before formally Apprenticing them. In theory, if a non-Bonisagus came along and claimed them, the original Bonisagus magi can simply bonisnatch them back. This would cut the tutoring short, but is a valid thing for a Bonisagus to do (in the sense that the apprentice was already determined to be valuable enough to be a Bonisagus apprentice.) I would imagine that they would wait a season for their Gift to be opened, and THEN bonisnatch them back, as it would be pretty clear that the Bonisagus had plans for the child, and thus would seek to reprimand the snatching magi for being a bit of a jerk and not thinking the obvious response through.

The issue becomes what happens when ANOTHER bonisagus magi comes along and takes the proto-apprentice. The original magi can't bonisnatch their would-be apprentice back. However, unless there is some specific reason why House Bonisagus demands that apprentices have their Gift opened immediately (perhaps in order to increase the population of magi as quickly as possible, or something - YSMV), I would imagine that the rest of the House would frown on such activities.

So, it's pretty easy for me to concieve of having most Bonisagus magi be (for example) formally apprenticed at 10, regardless of when they were found - as the Bonisagus have little to fear in keeping their Gifted children around.

37

Yeah, I seem to recall that the last time this came up, the general consensus was "The spirit was for Trades and Crafts, but the RAW allows for Magic Theory as well." I think one of the editors came along and gave it their official unofficial stamp of approval, as well.

38

I think both of these criteria are key to the matter. A person using an ability with a full-time professional intensity throughout the season, can train an apprentice in the ability, without disrupting his work.

An ability which is only rarely used cannot be trained. In callen's example, training bargain would require to the master to take time off work to focus on bargain. He must set up an artificial learning context, something known as teaching, which is usually more efficient learning wise, but he loses his normal income. This makes sense.

This does not mean that bargain cannot be trained. A petty itinerant merchant probably has bargain as his primary professional skill, and by RAW, he can train his apprentice. There is an argument against training bargaining though, in that the master cannot correct a mistake made by the apprentice in the way he would with a craft. This is essentially the same for every social skill. You do not get second chances. I don't think that argument is an absolute winner, and it would be against RAW.

This is not nitpicking. Playing long-term advancement, as we do in ArM, we will over and over again have the situation where PC1 wants to learn skill X with the help of PC2, but PC2 wants to get more out of the season than the 2 measly xp from exposure. Over the course of a saga, we can work our way through the entire skill list, and bicker over each individual skill X. Can it be trained or can it not? You are right, Ionian, we probably all agree about crafts, professions, awareness and concentration, but that's only a fraction of the list.

ArM4 was easier (serf's parma), in that skills could be trained, while talents and knowledges could not. We could just look up in the book and decide what is trainable and not. ArM5 leaves it to a judgement call every time a new skill comes up.

Erik Tyrrell, who was playtester on ArM5, posted very early in this trade, that magi cannot train, because magi do not earn a living. I can buy that statement as a description of the spirit of the rule, even though the argument is bonkers. Magi may very well be set up in a position where they need to and do earn a living.

At the end of the day, every saga needs to make its house rule.

39

Hi,

Once we must resort to using our own judgment, often a two-star resort, we can consider whether the rule for training ought simply be eliminated.

No training! It isn't needed. In theory, that's what masters do for apprentices. In practice, maybe the apprentices are simply being forced to learn a living and fall into the Practice category. The master isn't training the apprentice as much as forcing him to earn a living, providing an environment where that is possible and enough guidance to get by.

That provides 4 or 5xp per season, iirc. At four seasons per year, that's 16-20xp, which is reasonably close to the typical 15xp/year of chargen.

At that point, might as well allow anything to be practiced at 4xp/year, if it's even vaguely reasonable. Arts, abilities, whatever. The existence of a trainer who is earning a living makes things vaguely reasonable.

We can then consider what activities the trainer/master is allowed to be doing. My answer would be, exposure xp. If the master gains xp from anything other than Exposure, he is too busy with his own learning to really train.

Obviously, the master must have sufficiently high skill compared to the trainee in order to provide that suitable environment.

Anyway,

Ken

40

That makes a lot of sense, Ken.

It does not solve the problem which got me into a dispute in my troupe though. Under your proposal, the magus can still train (force-practice) a grog in Magic Theory, essentially for free. It is just a little slower.

The forced practice example in the book gives 5xp btw. Training is master skill + 3, which I find a bit generous.