[YOU are the QUAESITOR] Legal Questions in My Saga

I considered this. I think in Etienne's defense, he'll say he made sure he was seen by Renoir casting invisibility on himself, and offered to turn him invisible too later in the siege. This was a defensive measure, as Etienne cannot just ward himself from metal like Renoir can.

Also, it could be argued that Etienne figured that seeing Renoir break the Code might be reason for him to avoid being seen initially, in case Renoir took a 'no witnesses' approach to his breaking of hermetic law. Possibly Renoir forfeits protection from the Code when he breaks it.

Overall, compared to Renoir's actions, I think charging Etienne will be small potatoes.

Additionally, the core reason for there to be a proscription against scrying is to stop others from stealing magical secrets or personal business. In general, I think the "scrying while invisible" in the context of a pitched battle is an issue lacking much in the way of criminality, though it does violate the letter of the law, though not the intent.

At least, that's my take... but I love hearing alternative views.

Vrylakos

Hm.... a new query:

What might be the fallout, mundane and Hermetic, if the Lady Pellegrina revealed herself to be a member of the Order of Hermes to the uncrowned Louis, potential Prince of France in 1223?

V

My guess, death by wizard's march.

If he accepts that she is wizard, he will order her to serve him as court wizard. If she refuses, he will have to try to execute her as a threat to his rule (civil war brewing, are you with me or against me). If she accepts, she is breaking the code against court wizards.

To what purpose would she make this revelation. To get favors from him? Then she would have to return the favors and that would violate hte code. I can't see it working out in any direction other than a march on her and the king looking to find out about this order that was revealed to him.

I respectfully disagree with the good ladyphoenix.

Assuming Prince Louis knows what the Order of Hermes is, he will likewise know that Lady Pellegrina is forbidden by the Code from serving either him or his enemies. Therefore, from his point of view, the Lady will have declared herself neutral and beyond the mundane issues of the succession conflict.

More generally, Lady Pellegrina will be removing herself from her ambiguous position and formally declaring her allegiance to the Order. The potential fallout from that, I think, would involve her abandoning her rank and position as a noblewoman in favor of the rank and position of a magus. Given the civil unrest, I see that as a very wise move on her part because she would be officially separating herself entirely from that conflict.

Hi,

  1. Of course she's in danger of facing charges, no matter what she does. Someone is out to get her, after all.

  2. If one's own brother is in imminent peril, it is hardly "interfering" to do something about it. To just stand by is unnatural, inhuman and dishonorable and is so understood by pretty much everyone in the world. Besides, the Code does not forbid "involvement," just "interfering," and that is subjective. But I'd then take a look at the magus' actions: Did they bring ruin upon his sodali? If not, then he is innocent. I would further investigate how it is that the accusing magus was there to begin with. The likely outcome would be that the accuser would be in big trouble, and the accused less so, if at all.... unless I found something more interesting, or real consequences resulted that I could not trace to the accuser.

Of course, that's if I were running a neutral, disinterested Q averse to being pestered with trivia and especially wary of becoming the tool of some other magus' agenda, thereby diminishing the reputation and prestige of my entire House.

But that's just me.

Anyway,

Ken