Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Ars Magica: Lumen Montis, A Covenant in the Alps [IC]
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="anonystu" data-source="post: 1165675" data-attributes="member: 10897"><p>"I have given careful thought and research to the matters at hand, and would like to offer my opinions, although I am most interested in reaching the point where all of our interests are best served."</p><p></p><p>"I agree with Marcus: this is a generous detail by any standard, and the political fallout from refusing would be grave: we would be at the mercy of other covenants' offers, and would make ourselves a constant and powerful enemy. My suggestion for future negotiations is simple: a one-time payment of vis to eliminate our vis obligation. If the areas we claim are rich in the flow of magic, then we should aim to be self-sufficient as soon as possible." [Daniela doesn't seriously think a rejection is coming up (if there is a strong sentiment to reject, or to be more demanding, she'll oppose), nor does she feel the buyout payment is particularly important.]</p><p></p><p>"The name of our covenant is not very important to me. I think Marcus's suggestion of illumination is a respectable one." ["Accendare" (the infinitive?)sounds better to me, but I don't remember enough Latin. Daniela plans to murder at least two covenant members over the...no, no, she really doesn't care.]</p><p></p><p>"Our mutual obligations are the heart of the covenant: what binds us together will determine the strength of our interactions, and the degree to which we can focus on our work without distraction. We should forbid intracovenant Wizard War, and add a mutual defense pact, although, from prior experience in Rome, there should be a designated process, difficult, but not impossible, to prevent one over-aggressive magi from enmeshing the Covenant in war. The prevention of that goes hand-in-hand with the powers of the Primus, and the method for resolving disagreements." [The lack of intracovenant Wizard War is moderately important, although Daniela again feels right now she'll need to expend little energy there. Mutual defense is less important, and some method of resolving disagreements that isn't vulnerable to two person cabals (see below) is moderately important. This all pales to the next question.]</p><p></p><p></p><p>"We all have our separate goals: they are dizzingly varied: the things we speak of to accomplish are great and will take much time and effort. The temptation to use the resources of the covenant, while not giving in full back, are there, and most be acknowledged by us all. This temptation, it must be iterated, is self-defeating: the suspicions that surround a covenant where resource sharing is not monitored will poison the good will, and this lack of good will will make all of our goals harder to achieve.</p><p></p><p>Therefore, I would suggest, that there would be obligation to the covenant. This obligation should start off strong for two reasons. First, while we are just founding our covenant, it is vital that we work in a coordinated, organized fashion to best create a covenant with the resources for us to begin our serious work. Secondly, for future additions to our covenant, it provides a way for them to make suitable payment to our covenant for the resources we provide. </p><p></p><p>I would suggest a system where for the first ten years of membership, each magi donates one season of service per year, or ten seasons total. to the covenant. For their second ten years, each magi would donate one season of service per years, with two exceptions, or eight seasons of service. In the third ten years, there would be four years off, until after forty years of membership, each member would be at the minimum of two seasons of service per ten years. The content, and allowable spacing of the seasons of service depends on what powers we grant to a primus, so, I will speak of that later."</p><p></p><p>"In addition, a system that depends on some form of repayment later is ripe to abuse: it must be stronger, and less open to interpretation, or to fostering potential disagreements about the use of resources. I would suggest a system that exchanges use of covenant resources, including stocks of vis, in exchange for seasons of service to the covenant: this will allow us to contribute in the best ways we can: those of us who are strong scribes, but weak in sources of vis can use the covenant stocks, while helping those magi who gain benefit from a strong library."</p><p></p><p>[This is Daniela's strongest point, on which she exerts most of her influence: she wants to see a strong commitment (theoretically, even stronger than proposed above), especially in the early going. She also does not wish a fast and loose resource system: she's seen disagreements and worse about this before, and wishes to head it off now, with a strong charter.]</p><p></p><p></p><p>"I thikn a primus is a necessary selection: other than not standing out, we will all have better things to accomplish than to oversee every element of our covenant. I would also not like to give the temptation of manipulation to the position. Therefore, I would suggest a rotating primus among all members, with a short term, five years or less, but probably no less than two." [Daniela's second most important issue: she wants to spread out the power of the Primus as thinly as possible, and also not have it be something where being on the wrong side of an alliance matters.]</p><p></p><p></p><p>"The powers of a primus should be at the least, handling affairs with the mundanes, overseeing unimportant interactions with other covenants, and generally maintenance of the Covenant. I would also suggest that the Primus be able to designate what the best terms of service to the covenant are, although these should not be decisions made in isolation, but with the input of the entire covenant. With the rotating Primus system, I do not fear that power being consolidated: those who seek to abuse their power will not find themselves in power for very long. In so far as keeping the stocks of vis and the library, I would have the Primus deal with those as well: the rotating position will make all members familiar with all aspects of the covenant, which can only be to our benefit, although I would seek to make those decisions very easy: a period of strong deliberation as the methods of repayment and service needed will stop much need for discussion later. A method of overriding decisions, is of course, important." [Daniela likes the primus determining service to the covenant only insofar as the terms are short. Much more power than this will cause her to balk slightly.]</p><p></p><p>"I can see the merits of other standards, but for important decisions, unanimous minus one seems reasonable. This minus one, of course, does not include the member at hand if the vote directly involves them." [Note how this is subtly more lenient, but really, Daniela's willing to shift to other positions, but wants at least a supermajority.]</p><p></p><p>"Finally, I agree with the value of a strong history of a Covenant." [Whew. All done.]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="anonystu, post: 1165675, member: 10897"] "I have given careful thought and research to the matters at hand, and would like to offer my opinions, although I am most interested in reaching the point where all of our interests are best served." "I agree with Marcus: this is a generous detail by any standard, and the political fallout from refusing would be grave: we would be at the mercy of other covenants' offers, and would make ourselves a constant and powerful enemy. My suggestion for future negotiations is simple: a one-time payment of vis to eliminate our vis obligation. If the areas we claim are rich in the flow of magic, then we should aim to be self-sufficient as soon as possible." [Daniela doesn't seriously think a rejection is coming up (if there is a strong sentiment to reject, or to be more demanding, she'll oppose), nor does she feel the buyout payment is particularly important.] "The name of our covenant is not very important to me. I think Marcus's suggestion of illumination is a respectable one." ["Accendare" (the infinitive?)sounds better to me, but I don't remember enough Latin. Daniela plans to murder at least two covenant members over the...no, no, she really doesn't care.] "Our mutual obligations are the heart of the covenant: what binds us together will determine the strength of our interactions, and the degree to which we can focus on our work without distraction. We should forbid intracovenant Wizard War, and add a mutual defense pact, although, from prior experience in Rome, there should be a designated process, difficult, but not impossible, to prevent one over-aggressive magi from enmeshing the Covenant in war. The prevention of that goes hand-in-hand with the powers of the Primus, and the method for resolving disagreements." [The lack of intracovenant Wizard War is moderately important, although Daniela again feels right now she'll need to expend little energy there. Mutual defense is less important, and some method of resolving disagreements that isn't vulnerable to two person cabals (see below) is moderately important. This all pales to the next question.] "We all have our separate goals: they are dizzingly varied: the things we speak of to accomplish are great and will take much time and effort. The temptation to use the resources of the covenant, while not giving in full back, are there, and most be acknowledged by us all. This temptation, it must be iterated, is self-defeating: the suspicions that surround a covenant where resource sharing is not monitored will poison the good will, and this lack of good will will make all of our goals harder to achieve. Therefore, I would suggest, that there would be obligation to the covenant. This obligation should start off strong for two reasons. First, while we are just founding our covenant, it is vital that we work in a coordinated, organized fashion to best create a covenant with the resources for us to begin our serious work. Secondly, for future additions to our covenant, it provides a way for them to make suitable payment to our covenant for the resources we provide. I would suggest a system where for the first ten years of membership, each magi donates one season of service per year, or ten seasons total. to the covenant. For their second ten years, each magi would donate one season of service per years, with two exceptions, or eight seasons of service. In the third ten years, there would be four years off, until after forty years of membership, each member would be at the minimum of two seasons of service per ten years. The content, and allowable spacing of the seasons of service depends on what powers we grant to a primus, so, I will speak of that later." "In addition, a system that depends on some form of repayment later is ripe to abuse: it must be stronger, and less open to interpretation, or to fostering potential disagreements about the use of resources. I would suggest a system that exchanges use of covenant resources, including stocks of vis, in exchange for seasons of service to the covenant: this will allow us to contribute in the best ways we can: those of us who are strong scribes, but weak in sources of vis can use the covenant stocks, while helping those magi who gain benefit from a strong library." [This is Daniela's strongest point, on which she exerts most of her influence: she wants to see a strong commitment (theoretically, even stronger than proposed above), especially in the early going. She also does not wish a fast and loose resource system: she's seen disagreements and worse about this before, and wishes to head it off now, with a strong charter.] "I thikn a primus is a necessary selection: other than not standing out, we will all have better things to accomplish than to oversee every element of our covenant. I would also not like to give the temptation of manipulation to the position. Therefore, I would suggest a rotating primus among all members, with a short term, five years or less, but probably no less than two." [Daniela's second most important issue: she wants to spread out the power of the Primus as thinly as possible, and also not have it be something where being on the wrong side of an alliance matters.] "The powers of a primus should be at the least, handling affairs with the mundanes, overseeing unimportant interactions with other covenants, and generally maintenance of the Covenant. I would also suggest that the Primus be able to designate what the best terms of service to the covenant are, although these should not be decisions made in isolation, but with the input of the entire covenant. With the rotating Primus system, I do not fear that power being consolidated: those who seek to abuse their power will not find themselves in power for very long. In so far as keeping the stocks of vis and the library, I would have the Primus deal with those as well: the rotating position will make all members familiar with all aspects of the covenant, which can only be to our benefit, although I would seek to make those decisions very easy: a period of strong deliberation as the methods of repayment and service needed will stop much need for discussion later. A method of overriding decisions, is of course, important." [Daniela likes the primus determining service to the covenant only insofar as the terms are short. Much more power than this will cause her to balk slightly.] "I can see the merits of other standards, but for important decisions, unanimous minus one seems reasonable. This minus one, of course, does not include the member at hand if the vote directly involves them." [Note how this is subtly more lenient, but really, Daniela's willing to shift to other positions, but wants at least a supermajority.] "Finally, I agree with the value of a strong history of a Covenant." [Whew. All done.] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Playing the Game
Play by Post
Ars Magica: Lumen Montis, A Covenant in the Alps [IC]
Top