Hmmm, I need to look closer at that, it could be the way to deal with politics and argumentative texts.
Keep in mind that you have to have someone to argue with which will require someone to actually want to read what she wrote. If she wants that, then she needs to get a reputation and, to my mind, that will require stories and not just a few background die rolls. Why should an influential Traditionalist who could sway votes in the Trbunal (and eventually the Grand Tribunal) both reading a treatise by "yet another soft mundane-loving Jerbiton"? How do they get the person to engage?
I agree that diputatio is a good way to game it out, but I'd make the player work out the plan and execute on it and more than just writing a book. Given the Tribunal frequencies, this is something that could take years.
Oh, and don't forget the story options revolving around a ticked-off political opponent or hidden allies for that matter!
Good luck.
Well if the tractatus is no more than a piece of paper that says "In my opinion, the current clauses about mundane interference in the Peripheral Code suck", then you might be right.
However, according to the OP, this is meant to be a:
So it seems perfectly reasonable to assume that this meant to be a treatment of the problems that there are with the current clauses in the Code and a discussion on how some proposed variant of the Code would be better, and if it is meant to be persuasive it probably has a go at addressing some of the counter-arguments against the proposed variants. In other words, it seems something entirely suitable to study the Ability Code of Hermes from, because it is an argument about the Peripheral Code.
Look historically at works written to argue a subjective standpoint like religion or politics etc, and compare with books written ABOUT subjects.
Without using ridiculous extremes for showcasing something unrealistically unlikely as you do above, perhaps you will notice that books arguing subjects tends to be lightweight overall, with exceptions, but they will generally be much shorter texts.
There is also commonly a big difference in trying to learn and understand a piece of information compared to reading a written argument. Even if that wasnt true, there is also the fact that an argumentative text has a drastically lower signal to noise ratio regarding information density.
I am.
(I know it is out of period) http://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Disputatio_pro_declaratione_virtutis_indulgentiarum is written to argue a subjective viewpoint about religion. And it is short.
You could easily study this work, despite how short it is, for way more than a Season. People still do today.
"Studying" is more than mere reading.