I have to mostly agree here. There is no rule saying you need a ritual to dispel a ritual, while there is a rule that you need a ritual to dispel more permanent magic such as invested effects in items, the familiar bond, etc. I would expect longevity rituals would fall under the latter category, but I'm not sure. They lie in a strange place between a lab activity and a ritual.
I do see why we so often end up with the claim Mark states. I think the best justification for it might actually be story. I think more interesting story options would arise if rituals could only be brought down by rituals. Then there might be more effort put into stopping rituals before they're completed or finding alternative ways to end a ritual that don't involve prodigious amounts of vis. I wouldn't mind just adding the ritual requirement for bringing down rituals and then halving the effect of ritual counter-magic against invested effects and the like. But that would all require a bit of house ruling.
I agree that it doesn't need a ritual. I don't agree that it is trivial to take down an Aegis beyond 30th level. Doing so requires a specialist and/or cooperation.
Dispelling, in my humble opinion should NEVER be a ritual. The ability to counter magic/dispel/etc should always be significantly easier than casting a spell. We need to avoid running into the whole bee-hive of complex defences that it is not feasible to take down without you being killed before doing so-etc
No no. Ultimately, rituals accomplish grandiose utility affects as I like to call them (with the exception of the plot non-hermetic ones such as the Poof-goes-the-Diedne); however, they should be EASILY removed by determined opponent. Especially a determined opponent with a formulaic spell that is build for the countering/dispelling of VIM spells.
The Aegis serves an excellent purpose and does so immensely well. Multiple purposes actually of which one has been mentioned very clearly (demons, fey, etc etc); however, it also prevents un-expected hostility which is a HUGE benefit. If you invite someone into your house, odds are there is no way they will be able to harm you should hostilities arise.
The Aegis should never defend you against a strong and determined opponent with the same schooling (e.g. another Hermetic Mage) who is outside of it already. It may do so but that is a product of the ability of your sodales and their wrath should the aegis be taken down, and not the mere fact that you have a magical shield guarding you.
I'm not even sure that this is a reasonable thing to contemplate. Of course, it is possible, but I think it lies at the extreme. There have to be a lot of stars in correct allignment.
To take down an Aegis without retribution or prosecution, the Magus(Magi) doing it has to have declared a Wizard's War against the entire covenant membership. Otherwise, they risk honking off some other Magi not involved in the conflict and possibly being convicted for depriving another Magus of their Magic (taking down an Aegis before it expires, requiring another Aegis casting).
For a weak new spring covenant of spring magi, sure, it's simple. That 20th level Aegis comes down easily, after they've annoyed a lone Flambeau who's a Perdo afficianado. He takes down their Aegis and proceeds to pound them with PeCo spells or his handy dandy spear. Heck, he could probably do the 30th level, if he knows some Vim, but as the Aegis increases in power, so must the specialization of the magus taking it down. Eventually, you get into the realm of hiring or convincing a specialist to declare a Wizard's War against the magi to bring down the covenant, which takes timing and planning, and resources to pay a specialist sufficiently large amounts to convince him to be a mercenary for your cause.
The issue first came up for us because our saga involves newly gauntleted magi sent to Venice on a mission. We are all from separate covenants and are expected to return home in a few years once the mission is done. In the meantime we do our best to cooperate and secure the magical resources being illegally traded through Venice.
We had to set up a few labs and an Aegis to protect ourselves and the items we confiscate, but we are under no circumstances supposed to set up a covenant. We are supposed to cooperate but still work to position our own houses best in Venice.
The upshot is that a magus might have an easier time talking his way out of trouble for dispelling our Aegis, than the one at an established covenant like Verdi. Needless to say, I was a bit shocked when I realized how little magical protection our Aegis actually provided against a determined Hermetic foe.
I'm not so sure, you spent Vis, you have a working Aegis designed to protect you from certain nuisances. Unless there is a Wizard's War, then it is depriving of magical power. If the vis used for the Aegis was conrtibuted by all sources, you all have a case for it...
Of course, a determined Hermetic Foe will do what they can to ensure it never gets to Tribunal.
I disagree here. Aegis is supposed to be an effective defense against Hermetics and powerful entities, not just nuisances like goblins or folk magicians. Aegis, along with Parma, should prevent the situation where first strikes overwhelm defenders. This provides the security that lets Magi get along. I disagree with the tendency to nerf defences by requiring that Aegis penetrate or by making it easy to dispel Aegis or Parma. Offensive spells are constantly being make more effective with each supplement that introduces a new way to add to casting totals or to gain arcane connections and the balance is shifting too far.
If you want an in-game reason why a ritual should be used to dispel a ritual, you can argue that only the expenditure of vis can match the power of the vis expended in the original ritual.
I don't think it's all that easy to take down an Aegis, though.
To do it automatically, I constructed a chart below. First, you have to have an Unraveling within 10 levels of the Aegis level (or it's not automatic and subject to randomness). Then, you also have to have a penetration level in excess of the Aegis level (as per the description of the Aegis spell). Then, combining those two, you have the minimum casting score to make it go off automatically.
Sure, throwing penetration modifiers in might do something, but I've been trying to think of what could constitute an AC to an Aegis, and I really can't think of one.
If you don't need a ritual but even if you do need one: penetration is not a matter, just use a good old wizard's communion (it's easier if it is not a ritual since it just use 6 seconds of 4 magi to bring down the aegis... and since only the caster sigil will be there, only he must necessarly be covered by wizard's war).
Some people do house-rule it to require a ritual, but in my experience the whole point is somewhat moot as something as significant as bringing down an Aegis is very much a story event. If the storyguides want the NPCs to bring down your Aegis, they will. And if the players want to do it, the storyguide is going to work with the players to make that story element happen. Whether it's a ritual or not makes very little difference in story terms with the exception of costing the players their vis.
Exactly so. The story reasons are much more important than the mechanics. And even then, the mechanics illustrate it's not really all that easy. Story wise, someone brings down the PCs Aegis, they've got a problem they need to deal with it. If the PCs do it, they better have worked on their story beforehand, or be prepared for the consequences, both immediate and long term.
I thought of that as soon as I clicked Submit. It is unlikely that they would go missing, or that the are handed out indiscriminantly, though. Still, all these things bear out marklawford's contention. There is a story reason for this happening, and then there will be story consequences once it does.
Helping another magus to destroy an Aegis with Wizard's Communion will still open the helpers to prosecution for deprivation of magical power, if the attack is outside of Wizard War. The only advantage that the helpers have is that it might be more difficult to prove (or discover) that they were involved. But if it can be proved somehow (say, via witness testimony) then they will still be in trouble.
Agree with Richard, about the witnesses and problems with communing to cast it. Also, the magus must've declared Wizard's War against every member of the covenant, or he's still liable for prosecution of depriving of magical power.
If they're PCs who are losing their Aegis, then more than likely they've done something really stupid to deserve such a declaration. If it is PCs who are taking down the Aegis, then, you're going to have some really interested stories, and Wizard's War will be the order of the saga for some time. Retribution of Quaesitorial involvement is likely at some point.
Well, I could do mine. And we can also get into an argument about penetration of the Aegis, for those troupes that require Aegis to penetrate, what happens when they have a suboptimal Aegis? Say it has a penetration of 10. Does the spell need to beat 10 or does it need to beat the level of the Aegis?
Since most groups that require penetration for the Aegis only do so when it wards away creatures and not against spells, that's a bit of a moot point, neh?
Ofcourse, that little fix would also neatly eliminate the comments about how the Unravelling spells as written as actually wrong - it's not +10 levels, it's +2 magnitudes and all that
