Covenants Chapter Three: Governance
This page is part of the Covenants Open Content
Governance
The governance of a covenant has a profound effect on the course of play of a saga. Some player magi are in charge of their own destiny, being the sole residents of their covenants and free to decide on how they will rule. Other player characters choose to become members of pre-established covenants, in which case they may suffer restrictions placed upon them by more senior members of the covenant. This chapter is designed to help the players and storyguide alike to decide upon three important matters: How is the covenant governed? What duties and responsibilities does each magus have? How loyal are the mundane people who live in the covenant?
Forms of Governance
There are five basic systems by which covenants may be governed; which one is used is very much a matter of history and personal choice. Every covenant is likely to have its own unique method of governance, but the following five systems are at the root of all possible variations, and serve as good templates from which to work.
Perhaps the most natural form of covenant governance to members of the Order of Hermes is Democracy, a microcosm of the Order itself. Every magus in the covenant enjoys the same benefits and the same obligations towards the community as a whole. Governance of the resources of a covenant is through consensus, determined at regular meetings of the covenant’s members. Of course, a democracy in this situation usually involves equal rights for the magi only; the rest of the people who dwell within the physical bounds of the covenant are non-participatory members of this ”democracy.” Furthermore, in a true democratic system there is no leader of the covenant, and all magi are treated as equal in status. If all the magi are of approximately the same age (as player covenants often are), a democratic system is often the most attractive. Such systems are most commonly found in Spring covenants, newly founded by magi fresh-faced from apprenticeship, or in Winter covenants, where only the eldest still survive as the younger magi have all left for pastures new.
Another natural form of governance is that perpetrated most commonly amongst the mundane inhabitants of Mythic Europe — Autocracy. In such a governance system, one magus is responsible for making all the decisions of the covenant. There is no voting procedure; the other members of the covenant may make suggestions to the covenant’s leader, but the final decision rests in the hands of the leader. The covenant’s leader is usually an older magus — often much older than the other magi — and often appoints his own successor. Covenants with such a system may become very political, with some factions being favored by the leader, and others vying for his attention. In Hermetic society, there often needs to be a reason why one magus can dominate others so totally, such as a physical or magical means (often secret) of restricting access to a particular resource.
An Hierarchy is a hybrid form between autocracy and democracy. The members of the ruling council are divided into two or more tiers of government, with each tier containing one or more magi, and usually increasing in size as relative social standing drops. Those in the higher tiers have more rights than those in lower tiers, often in the form of more power at council meetings to make decisions. Hierarchical governance is most often found in old, well-established covenants, where the older magi do not feel that newly-Gauntleted members deserve the same rights as those who have already proved their worth to the covenant. Youngsters may have restricted access to the covenant’s resources, more duties than the elder magi, and less power to make decisions until they have fulfilled some criteria and been accepted into the upper tiers of governance. A covenant with only two tiers — a ruling council and the rest of the magi — is called an oligarchy. Very large covenants at the height of Autumn often have a complicated hierarchy of committees and circles, providing ample opportunity for intrigue. Implicit in such a structure is the possibility of social mobility — that in time, a magus at the bottom of the hierarchy may rise to the very top, and enjoy the privileges he lacked in his youth.
Also arising from a democratic system is the Bureaucracy. A bureaucracy divides its magi up into offices or subcommittees. Each office consists of one or more magi, whose duty it is to deal with a single aspect of the covenant’s governance. The whole council (or perhaps just a representative of each subcommittee) meets on a regular basis to keep everyone informed of the business of the covenant as a whole. If affairs come up that require a decision, then the members of the appropriate office may have sole responsibility for making it, may get extra votes for items under their purview, may get a casting vote to break ties, or may have any number of other special privileges. In average-sized covenants, each office consists of a single magus, and all magi have their own offices.
Finally, covenants may constitute an Anarchy. This style of ”governance” might result from young magi establishing a covenant to escape from a more draconian system in their home covenant, or it may be that the covenant consists of mature, strong-minded magi who refuse to have decisions made for them by committee. In any case, in an anarchy there is no method of making decisions; issues are resolved by the magus who is closest to hand. An anarchy may not necessarily be chaotic and undisciplined; the covenant may still have a charter which details each magus’s rights, duties, and responsibilities, but day-to-day governance is conducted on a very ad hoc basis.
These five basic systems are not mutually exclusive. A system could exist where a covenant is basically democratic, but the covenant leader must ratify all decisions made by the council, and may veto any decision, even if it is unanimous amongst the other magi. An anarchic bureaucracy might give total fiat to members who hold a particular office to act in accordance with their post’s remit.
Membership of a Covenant
Most covenants only consider members of the Order of Hermes to be members of their covenant — companions, grogs, and other covenfolk are either associates of the covenant or its employees. However, if magi wish to extend membership to non-magi, they should detail a procedure in their charter (see below). The presence of non-magi on the ruling council of a covenant is unusual, but has its advantages in good relations with one’s covenfolk and one’s neighbors. The disadvantage is that non-magi often have different priorities from members of the Order, and may pursue their own agendas to the detriment of the magical members of the council.
In the following discussion of covenant leadership and procedure, it is assumed that a covenant’s magi and a covenant’s members are interchangeable; however, the meaning of membership can extend to cover non-magi without altering the intent and consequences of covenant governance. It is also assumed that if a non-magus is considered a member of a covenant, then she is granted the same rights and responsibilities (where applicable) as at least some of the magi in the covenant.
Leadership
Covenants invariably need leaders. Even democracies find it useful to have them, if only to act as a chairmen at covenant meetings and to break tied votes. Additionally, it is useful to have a single voice to represent the covenant at Tribunal meetings and the like. Even in systems where there is an inner council that truly rules the covenant, one magus is usually made the titular head. Only anarchies (by definition) lack any form of official leader.
In hierarchies, the leader may be chosen by his predecessor or an inner council, and thus rule by strength of tradition. Alternatively, he may have to earn or somehow qualify for the position (certamen is a popular mechanism, particularly in Tremere-dominated covenants). In a democracy, the leader is likely to be chosen from among the covenant’s members by an election, but there are some covenants where every magus must take a turn at sitting in the high seat. Of course, if a leader or spokesman is elected, there should also be a procedure for dismissing him if he fails to fulfill his duties.
In addition to a leader, covenants with any social system may wish to consider appointing officers to deal with specific aspects of the covenant’s life — its library, vis sources and stocks, grogs and covenfolk, magical items and laboratories, external relations, money, and the like. If all these duties are left with the covenant’s leader, he will be overburdened. If no one takes charge of these things, there is a danger that vis will not be collected, books will molder, and the covenant’s buildings will degrade. Small covenants can usually get away with the members having collective authority, but as the number of magi increases (or the covenant gets richer in terms of its resources), delegation of responsibility becomes a wise course of action. These positions may be chosen in the same way that a leader is chosen — elected or assigned — and should have clear duties and responsibilities associated with them. It is also necessary to give the officers the authority needed to perform their duties. One very effective system is to give the casting vote (which breaks ties) to the officer under whose purview a proposal falls.
Boons, Hooks, and Governance StylesNone of the styles of governance in themselves require any specific Boons or Hooks. However, some Boons and Hooks are particularly appropriate for different governance methods.
Titles for the Leader of a Covenantprinceps (first, chief), pontifex (high priest), imperator (commanderin-chief), rector (guidesman, governor), aedilis (aedile), dictator, disceptator (chairman), interpres (spokesman), ductor (leader) Typical Offices and Their Titlespraefectus (governor, provost), magister (master), diocetes (treasurer), procurator (administrator), interpres (spokesman), vilicus (steward), curator (overseer), librarius (librarian) |
The Council Meeting
The council meeting is the place where things get done and matters get decided, and nearly every covenant, regardless of its method of governance, holds them on a regular basis. A wise course of action is to decide upon a regular schedule of meetings, perhaps one per season (or maybe more frequently). At each meeting, the course of the next few months is decided. Responsibility for collecting from regular sources of vis can be assigned, for example, and mundane matters regarding food sources and the upkeep of the covenant dealt with. It is also at these meetings that the appointed officers (if any) make their reports. Each magus tells the covenant what resources he needs for the upcoming season (for example, books, magical items, specialized labs, etc.), and if more than one magus needs the same limited resource, conflicts are resolved.
The Hermetic seasons are based on the stellar seasons of Spring (Vernal Equinox to Summer Solstice), Summer (Summer Solstice to Autumnal Equinox), Autumn (Autumnal Equinox to Winter Solstice) and Winter (Winter Solstice to Vernal Equinox). The first day of each season are good days to hold regular meetings, as are the Quarter Days (May Day, Lammas, All Hallows Day, Candlemas) that mark the mid-points of these seasons.
It is not reasonable to expect every magus to attend every meeting — magi are often called away from the covenant on excursions or professional visits — and magi are not the most sociable creatures even at the best of times. However, most covenants institute some procedure requiring a quorum, or minimum number or proportion, of the covenant’s magi to attend a meeting for it to be able to make decisions on the covenant’s behalf, else a single magus can start making decisions for the entire council. A quorum equal to more than half of the covenant’s members is often considered reasonable. Depending upon the council’s structure, other criteria may be necessary. Perhaps the covenant’s leader or a certain number of officers must be present, or some other restrictions met, before the decisions of the meeting can be held to be legal.
In addition to the regular meetings, there should also be some provision for holding irregular meetings so that decisions can be made in emergencies. The requirements for holding such meetings may be more relaxed than for the regular meetings, as it is often difficult getting people out of their laboratories mid-project. However, it is dangerous leaving important decisions regarding the safety of the covenant in the hands of a single magus, so some sort of procedure should be instituted for such occasions. In particular, these ”extraordinary meetings” should have more relaxed procedures for resolving issues, and perhaps different quorum criteria.
The Charter of Covenant
When magi gather together to work towards a goal, they swear to a covenant, or oath, which declares that they will support and maintain each other. This is the origin of the term “covenant” as the basic organizational unit of the Order; the actual physical structure and resources which protect and support those who partake in this oath are incidental. The breaking of this oath is taken very seriously by the Order of Hermes, and it is not unheard of for a Tribunal to allow a covenant to enforce this oath on its members. The Charter of Covenant is a written text detailing the Oath of Covenant, and includes a set of bylaws that detail precisely what a magus who joins the covenant is entitled to, what he is obligated to, and what will happen to him if he fails in his duties. If a charter has been notarized by a Quaesitor it is legally enforceable as part of the Tribunal’s Peripheral Code.
A good charter is unambiguous in its details — and some are meticulous pieces of legalese — as characters (whether controlled by players or the storyguide) invariably attempt to find loopholes that allows them to contravene the spirit of the charter to their benefit (and often to the detriment of the other members). While this can make for excellent stories of intrigue and chicanery, trying to proof your covenant (if a player) or your saga (if a storyguide) from charter abuse can be a daunting task.
Sections of the Charter
A covenant’s charter usually consists of a number of sections, each of which is detailed below.
The Oath of Covenant
This is the text of the oath sworn by a magus when he joins the covenant. It serves as a pledge of loyalty, a declaration of support, and a dedication to the goals and furtherance of the members of the covenant. Like most oaths, it is not always followed to the letter, and interpretations of it may vary wildly. However, the spirit of an oath is usually clear, and typically taken seriously.
Membership
The charter should contain a list of all magi who are members of the covenant, and their seals or signatures should be affixed to it to indicate that they agree to the contents of the charter. The requirements for membership should be clearly indicated in the charter; typical strictures state that the applicant must be a member of the Order and must be accepted by a vote of the council. There may be different levels of membership — full members, associate members, etc. — each with different privileges and obligations. Some covenants (usually Summer or Autumn covenants) require a period of servitude either before or after admittance to the covenant, during which time the applicant may not have full access to the privileges of a full member (such as voting, books, or vis).
Method of Governance
The next section of the charter clearly describes how the covenant is governed. It should unambiguously lay out the leadership (if there is one), offices and their duties, and the procedures for holding council meetings, both regular and extraordinary. The system by which the covenant makes decisions is described here, including all details and criteria for holding a legal meeting and ensuring that a legal decision is made. Finally, this section should describe the method by which the charter may be altered, should the need arise.
Council meetings may get rowdy, particularly with large numbers of magi, and some formal procedures may be nec essary to keep order. This may be as informal as giving each magus a right to speak in turn before a vote is held, or as formal as complex procedures where an item must be on the agenda, must be proposed, seconded, supported by the appropriate sub-committee, and then receive sufficient votes to be accepted by the council.
Not all decisions have to be made by vote. More unusual covenants may demand that decisions are left to chance, or stipulate that Might is Right (a popular choice in covenants with many followers of Tremere and Tytalus). Under the vast majority of circumstances, however, voting is the main organ of decision-making.
The charter should clearly state who is entitled to vote, and whether the type of proposal under discussion affects the number of voters. Usually each magus has a single vote, but in hierarchical covenants some magi may get multiple votes, or single votes that are worth twice as much, or the like. The matter of breaking tied votes should also be addressed. This privilege is usually left to the covenant’s leader — it may be the only unusual power he has — and may take the form of a casting vote (i.e., he only has an extra vote if the vote is tied) or an extra vote (which he may use at any time). Alternatively, ties may automatically default to maintenance of the status quo, or even result in certamen between the opposing sides.
Example Oaths of CovenantThe oath of Arae Flaviae is suitable for any covenant, particularly a young one. However, it may not be sufficient for some covenants, particularly those with a less democratic means of governance. The following Oath is suitable for a powerful covenant with lofty ideals: I, [Name] forthwith dedicate myself to the pursuit and exchange of knowledge, to the advancement and mastery of the magical arts, and to the fostering of peace amongst the magi of the Order of Hermes. This dedication is made not in name only, but shall be the guiding principle of my life at the Covenant of [Name]. May the Order of Hermes be preserved and may my small efforts add to its continued growth and strength. Towards the goals of this covenant I pledge my highest aspirations and beliefs. By the word of everything I hold to be true and just, I swear to obey the stipulations of the charter of the Covenant of [Name] till death do betray me to this oath. And if I fail, may the most rigorous of all masters, the Arts themselves, betray me and lead me into pain, failure, and dismal, eternal solitude. The next oath is suitable for an old covenant with a strong traditional leadership: I, [Name], swear that I am a magus of the Order of Hermes. I swear that I have always upheld and will continue to uphold the Code of Hermes and the Peripheral Code; that I have been trained solely in Hermetic Magic; and that all my apprentices shall be likewise trained. I further swear that I speak these words of my own free will and with complete understanding of their significance. I hereby renounce any and all ties to other covenants, and do solemnly swear allegiance to the Covenant of [Name]. I swear that this covenant’s goals, fortunes, hardships, allies, and enemies shall be my own. I swear to obey the covenant’s charter and be obedient to its pontifex. I swear, never, though action or inaction, to allow this covenant to come to harm. The Charter of Arae FlaviaeThe covenant of Arae Flaviae in the Rhine Tribunal was among the first covenants to consist of magi from more than one House. It was established in 780 and lasted just over a hundred years before its rivalry with another covenant caused both to be disbanded by the Rhine Tribunal. Nevertheless, the Oath of Covenant written by the members of Arae Flaviae is held up as a model charter for both its simplicity and clarity, and it espouses a democratic governance that has been widely copied throughout the Order of Hermes. Ratification of a charter by a Quaesitor (where this is mandatory, see below) is automatic if a covenant uses the Charter of Arae Flaviae without alteration. Many Spring covenants use this charter when they first establish themselves, although over time it tends to be amended to cover issues unique to the covenant’s situation or membership. Hermetic commentators have noted with wry amusement the frequency with which the Charter of Arae Flaviae is set aside as soon as a second generation of magi enter a covenant. A blank copy of this charter is presented in the Appendix in full: simply fill in the name of your covenant, the current year, and the names of the members. |
Covenant Resources
The resources of the covenant need to be clearly laid out in the charter, to distinguish that which is owned by the covenant from that owned by individual members of the covenant. This section tends to concentrate on resources important to magi rather than to people in general, and so might list the title of every book, the location of every vis source, the powers of every magical item, all in great detail, and then neglect to mention the physical buildings of the covenant, the land it owns, or the businesses it runs. The detail is very much dependent on the focus of the magi who wrote the charter, and those who have added to it over the years. It also depends on what resources are going to be granted (or denied) to members in the next section.
Broadly, the resources of a covenant may include some or all of the following: Hermetic books, mundane books, Lab Texts, vis stores, vis sources, magical items, laboratories and their equipment, silver and other valuable goods, sources of income, companions, soldiers, servants, livestock, buildings, land, chattels (the contents of the buildings), food and drink, good relationships with outsiders, and favors and boons owed to the covenant.
Member Rights
This section details the apportioning of the covenant’s resources among its members. The most basic rights of members are those of food, drink, and shelter; most covenants also assume that a laboratory is a basic right. Charters might not necessarily include these basic rights explicitly, but many do, particularly if withholding rights is the method of censure (see below).
More important to magi are the right to use the covenant’s library and magical items, to receive a share of the covenant’s vis, and perhaps to spend a portion of the covenant’s money. Access to the library and magical items is easily dealt with; many covenants allow their members to use both freely, although many have provisions for dealing with the situation where two magi wish to use the same resource at the same time.
The sharing of the covenant’s vis is perhaps the most contentious issue to be dealt with in the entire charter, and different covenants’ approaches vary dramatically. Some avoid the issue entirely by not claiming any vis at all; at such covenants all vis belongs to individuals, and vis found outside the bounds of the covenant belongs wholly to the finder. Members may be required to pay a yearly tithe of vis to meet the covenant’s vis demands, for the yearly casting of the Aegis of the Hearth, if nothing else.
Alternatively, the covenant may claim all vis for itself, and once the demands of the covenant itself have been met, the remainder (or a portion of the remainder) is divided up between the members of the covenant. The mechanics of this division must be indicated in the charter, along with who is responsible for the division. Harsher still, a charter may dictate that all vis belongs to the covenant as a whole, with individual members forced to petition the council for shares according to their needs. If individuals need to work to acquire a share of vis, then the Vis Salary Hook is appropriate to this covenant. On the other side of the coin, a covenant may divide up surplus vis each year between its members, represented by the Vis Grant Boon.
It should be decided whether the rules for the allocation of vis apply equally to vis from renewable sources and vis earned on adventures. Most charters allow magi to keep whatever vis they find, unless it proves to be a renewable source, in which case it belongs to the covenant. Any alternative method encourages magi to be secretive about the vis they find, and allows for cheating.
The monies owed by the covenant may be treated in the same way as vis, but most magi at least pretend to be less interested in money than vis, and allow the covenant to deal with all financial matters. There may be a facility in the charter for a magus to request that the covenant purchase an expensive item specifically for his use, in which case it needs to be stipulated just how much of the financial resources of the covenant may be requested by individual members.
Hierarchical covenants may restrict the rights of certain of its members, so that only the upper echelons get full access to all the resources of the covenant.
Covenants usually seek to improve themselves, and there may be a provision in the charter to reward members who perform work on the covenant’s behalf. This work might include copying of tomes for exchange, making magical items (with the covenant’s vis); or even taking on dangerous adventures such as bargaining with the local faerie king. The charter may stipulate a standard reward for particular tasks, or set aside a share from the yearly income of resources to pay those who perform covenant work.
Example Criteria for a Legal MeetingA quorum of a particular proportion of the magi must be present. The leader must be present. A certain number of officers must be present. A certain number of votes must be present. Example Methods of Casting VotesA show of hands A show of sigils, which may be deputized for magi who do not wish to attend A ballot (tokens placed into boxes or jars) Any of the above, but any member also has the option of demanding a secret ballot. Example Methods of Vote AllocationEvery magus gets one vote. Every magus gets a number of votes dependent on her status. The covenant leader can break ties with a casting vote. Each officer gets an extra vote when the issue covers her purview. Each officer gets the casting vote when the issue covers her purview. Example Methods of Adjudicating a Result
Example Types of VotingAll issues use the same adjudication method. Some issues require more relaxed or more stringent adjudication methods than others. Members may request that a stringent adjudication method be used for specific issues. |
Member Obligations
The most basic form of obligation required by covenants is the safeguarding of the covenant’s resources, the harvesting of vis sources, and the collection of mundane income. These duties may be devolved to covenfolk, but usually the magi of the covenant are responsible for ensuring that these are done. In older covenants it is common for the weight of the obligations to fall upon the shoulders of the younger magi, leaving their elders the luxury of more time to themselves.
Some covenants may have other obligations that must be performed at certain intervals, due to past events in its history or the threat of future misfortune. The charter should detail how such obligations are parceled out between its members, and whether the council can force a member to perform any ad hoc obligations (for example, adventures) that crop up.
Censure
Failure to meet the obligations owed according to the charter generally results in some form of censure. Few covenants reserve the right to censure a magus for his actions in general; only breaking the charter is a punishable offence. However, it is not unknown for covenants to have clauses in the Oath of Covenant that exhort a member to act in a responsible manner, so the interpretation of ”breaking the charter” can be nebulous at best.
Expulsion from the covenant is the most serious punishment a covenant can inflict. In most covenants, only a magus who betrays the charter can be expelled; some charters make expulsion automatic once the charter has been proven breached, others require a vote to enforce it.
Censure may also take the form of withholding the privileges of membership until a magus comes back into line with the charter. The covenant can withhold any resource that it holds in common. If it tries to deny access to a resource that belongs to an individual magus, however, this counts as “depriving or attempting to deprive a magus from his magical power,” and is in breach of the Oath of Hermes. This is why a covenant should be very careful to detail precisely what resources belong to it, and what belongs to individual members. Most commonly, the right of access to the library, and to shares of vis and money, are withheld until reparation is made. Denying a magus access to his laboratory is on shaky legal ground. Most Tribunals assume that a laboratory is provisioned from each magus’s share of the monetary wealth of a covenant, and therefore constitutes personal property. However, it is worth reading the small print in the charter! Some covenants go as far to consider even the basic items of food, drink, and shelter as privileges, and reserve the right to deny recalcitrant members the most fundamental requirements for living at the covenant as a way of controlling its members.
Example of a Complex Method of GovernanceThe covenant is governed by a ruling council, consisting of every magus of the covenant. One member is designated the disceptator, who is the declared leader of the covenant and responsible for representing the covenant to the Order and the world. A new disceptator is chosen by a majority vote of the full council following the death or disappearance (for not less than a year) of the previous incumbent; the post is held until death or disappearance. The covenant council holds four regular assemblies per year, on the first day of each stellar season. All members of the council must make every effort to attend these meetings, which do not have a quorum unless over half of the members of the council are present. The covenant’s disceptator must be present at every regular assembly. Matters for discussion must be given to the disceptator at least three days before the assembly; further issues may only be raised if seconded by another member of the council and with the permission of the disceptator. All matters are categorized into Issues of Significance, Issues of Consequence, and Ordinary Issues. Any issue that affects the membership, governance, or magical resources of the covenant is an Issue of Significance; any other issue may be declared an Issue of Significance by the disceptator. All issues which are not Issues of Significance are Ordinary Issues, but any member of the council can request that an Ordinary Issue is made an Issue of Consequence instead. Issues of Significance require a Majority by Member to be passed, Issues of Consequence require a Majority by Vote, Ordinary Issues simply require two votes in favor. A meeting without a quorum is only empowered to enact Ordinary Issues. In all issues, in the case of a tie, the disceptator has the casting vote. The Carrot and the StickIt is not necessary for a covenant to choose between the carrot (rewards) and the stick (obligations) to motivate its magi to improve the covenant and ensure its smooth running. The following sample rule mixes both approaches. A standard share is determined to be an equal portion of one-half of the covenant’s vis stores on the day following the Winter Solstice, or its pecuniary equivalent. A Standard Service consists of one season’s work at low personal risk; one month’s work at moderate personal risk; or one day’s work at high personal risk. The definition of risk is determined by a vote of the Council. Every magus who has performed one Standard Service to the covenant in the preceding eight seasons is entitled to one share each year, allocated on the day following the Winter Solstice. A magus may earn up to one extra share per year by performing an Additional Service equivalent to a Standard Service. A magus who is delinquent in his Standard Service does not receive a share, and is not eligible for Additional Service until his missing Standard Services have been made up. Obligations and the Code of HermesA covenant must be careful to weigh the obligations it places onto its members, for the Oath of Hermes states that a magus “shall not deprive or attempt to deprive another magus of his magical power,” and demanding two or more seasons of work each year from a magus could indeed be seen as an attempt to deprive him of his magical power by inhibiting his ability to study. However, numerous cases published at Tribunal have determined that when a magus takes the Oath of Covenant, he is fully aware of the contract to which he is agreeing, and always has the choice not to join that covenant. Several Tribunals have adopted the policy that a charter may demand of its members what it wishes, but cannot change those demands without the agreement of those affected; that is, the covenant cannot alter the obligation imposed on any magus against his will without committing a High Crime. |
The Official Seal
Depending upon the traditions of the local Tribunal, it may be necessary to have a charter approved by the Quaesitores. Where it exists, this ratification is obligatory, to ensure that the charter does not contain any clauses contrary to the laws of the Order, whether intentional or accidental. In the more organized (or, ”civilized”) Tribunals, the chief Quaesitor may keep a copy of the charter, and make it part of the Peripheral Code of that Tribunal. This has obvious advantages — if one of the members breaks the charter, they can be charged with a Low Crime to force them back into line. However, it also means that other magi know by which laws a covenant has chosen to govern itself, and can use this information to its own advantage.
No Quaesitor can dictate the contents of a charter, no matter how unusual, unless it contravenes the Oath of Hermes or breaks the Peripheral Code, in which case she can demand changes be made. Quaesitores may be very useful to consult when writing a charter, as most have seen many charters in their time, and may be able to offer advice to the inexperienced. A friendly Quaesitor might point out loopholes, allowing the storyguide to cast an impartial eye over a charter and indicate any areas that could be problematic. A less friendly Quaesitor (or storyguide!) may just smile wryly to himself at the foolishness of young magi.
Prevailing Loyalty
Prevailing Loyalty is a general measure of how loyal most members of the covenant are to the covenant’s magi, the covenant’s council (if it has one), and the covenant as a whole. It also reflects the general morale of the covenant and the willingness of the average member to act for the good or ill or its residents. The Prevailing Loyalty score is calculated based on factors including the average ”Loyal to Covenant” Personality Trait of the covenant’s servants, specialists, and soldiers; the social penalty of The Gift of the covenant’s magi; and the individual actions of the magi. It is expressed as a positive or negative number on the same general scale as Personality Traits.
Prevailing Loyalty and Individual Loyalty
The ”Loyal to Covenant” Personality Trait of any individual within the covenant (such as a grog) can vary by up to three points either way from the average Prevailing Loyalty of the covenant, although in general a player character may choose any Loyal to Covenant value he wishes. However, if this score is dramatically different from that of the covenant, taking a Personality Flaw to account for this difference is appropriate.
For an established covenant, the Prevailing Loyalty is liable to change over time, and this should have an influence on the fidelity of individual grogs (that is, those who frequently come under the control of players). However, Prevailing Loyalty and characters’ individual “Loyal” Traits need not track on a one-to-one basis. Characters with a Personality Flaw that affects their faithfulness are entirely unaffected by the Prevailing Loyalty. Grogs who are played as characters have more interaction with the magi, and are likely to experience increases in their “Loyal” Traits more quickly than the rest of the covenfolk. Similarly, they may tenaciously hold on to their devotion even if the dependability of their fellows takes a dip. Typically, individuals with extreme personal “Loyal” Traits track changes in Prevailing Loyalty poorly, whereas those with personal “Loyal” Traits close to zero are more likely to acquire or lose points in line with the Prevailing Loyalty. Ultimately, changes to individual Traits must be considered on a case-by case basis, but tend to follow the trend set by the Prevailing Loyalty.
Calculating Prevailing Loyalty
To calculate a covenant’s Prevailing Loyalty, first calculate the Base Loyalty, determined by summing the Gift Modifiers of the covenant’s magi (see the nearby table) and dividing by the total number of magi.
| Base Loyalty | Total of Gift Modifiers / Number of Magi |
| No Gift | 0 |
| The Gentle Gift | 0 |
| The Gift | –30 |
| The Blatant Gift | –105 |
Make a note of this Base Loyalty, for if the membership of the covenant changes, adjustments must be made to Base Loyalty without affecting any later loyalty points modifications due to player actions.
Once the Base Loyalty is known, the total loyalty points are calculated by applying modifiers to the Base Loyalty according to the environment of the covenant, the covenfolks’ treatment by the magi, and the actions of the members of the council. Total loyalty points are converted into a Prevailing Loyalty score using the Abilities: To Buy column of the Advancement Table (see ArM5, page 31), converting negative loyalty points into a negative Prevailing Loyalty.
Prevailing Loyalty with Non-magus MembersIf the ruling council of the covenant includes members who are not magi, then the covenfolk are more likely to have a higher morale, for they can deal with the unGifted members instead. Each unGifted member of the Council contributes zero points to the calculation of Base Loyalty, so the average loyalty points of all members of the ruling council will be lower. This effect can be seen in the example of Semita Errabunda; because Victor is on the ruling Council (as a member of the Order, even though he has no Gift), the covenant has a Base Loyalty of –38; without him, it would have –45 (–225 / 5). If Semita Errabunda should decide to include one of its companions on their council, they would have a Base Loyalty of –32 (–225 / 7). Including mundanes on the Council of Members must be more than a token gesture for it to affect Base Loyalty; their votes must be the equal of the Gifted members (or at least some of the Gifted members) in order to count. |
Sample Prevailing Loyalty Scores
|
Modifying Loyalty Due to Covenant Situation
Loyalty points are gained and lost for the equipment and provender given to the covenfolk, however, all of these things eat into the resources of the covenant. The covenant might offer better wages (see Chapter 5: Wealth) than is normal, or continue to care for retired members of their turb, in the manner of the Romans, by providing a pension. If the covenfolk have to work with inferior equipment this impacts their attitude, but likewise, soldiers given brand-new weapons and armor are more steadfast than those who have to steal from vanquished enemies. Chapter 5: Wealth gives details on the cost to the covenant of supplying equipment to the grogs. Living conditions, which are determined by the local environment (see Boons and Hooks), also influence fidelity. Finally, competent specialists put in charge of the covenfolk increase allegiance through diligence and hard work. Magi can employ up to three specialists who deal with the covenfolk on their behalf, rather than dealing with them directly. (These specialists are purchased with covenant Build Points as described on ArM5, page 72). The turb captain mediates between the magi and the grogs, the steward mediates between the magi and the specialists, and the chamberlain mediates between the magi and the servants. A single individual may perform up to two of these tasks (commonly the roles of steward and chamberlain); such a person is often called the autocrat. In this case, add loyalty points arising from both roles.
If only some of the covenfolk are affected by any of these modifiers, then reduce the modifier accordingly. For example, if the modifiers affect a third of the covenant, then reduce the effect on Prevailing Loyalty to one third. If conditions are dramatically different for different groups, the Divided Loyalty Hook is appropriate.
Situational Modifiers to LoyaltyLiving Conditions
Equipment
Money
Specialists
|
Prevailing Loyalty ExampleSemita Errabunda is a covenant with six magi. Darius has the Blatant Gift (–105 points), Carolus, Mari, Moratamis, and Tillitus all have the standard Gift (–30 points x 4 = –120 points), and Victor is an unGifted Redcap (0 points). Thus, the covenant has a Base Loyalty of –38 (–225 / 6). The covenant has no Living Conditions modifier, supplies its grogs with Standard equipment only, and offers them standard wages. They have a turb captain (6 loyalty points) and an autocrat (12 loyalty points), for a total of –18 loyalty points, which translates to Prevailing Loyalty –2. Note that as an established covenant, Semita Errabunda’s covenfolk have familiarity (see below) with its members’ Gifts, and thus, in actuality, have more loyalty points than this. |
Green Covenants
In a newly established covenant, or one with newly recruited covenfolk, it is unlikely that any of the covenfolk will have a ”Loyal to Covenant” Trait greater than zero, and it will often be lower. This is a harsh, but not unreasonable, fact of life. The mundane people recruited by the magi have no experience with Gifted characters, and to begin with have both suspicion and mistrust for their new employers (see ArM5, page 75). Over time, these feelings disappear as the covenfolk grow familiar to the covenant’s magi through regular contact (see Familiarity, below).
Established Covenants
Not all covenants have newly recruited covenfolk; many have existed long enough for the employees of the magi to become used to the feelings of distrust that result from The Gift. Some covenants have lasted so long that several genera tions of covenfolk have grown up behind their walls. Furthermore, some older covenants sponsor new covenants by supplying servants and grogs for them from their own population.
An established covenant usually has sufficient loyalty points through Familiarity (see below) to give them a Prevailing Loyalty of zero. The effect of The Gift on the occasional new recruit is diluted by the Familiarity felt by the rest of the covenant, but if a substantial number of new covenfolk join the covenant, reduce the number of loyalty points by the proportion of the total covenfolk they make up. Similarly, if a new magus should join the covenant, the covenfolk will not be comfortable with his Gift, and while the situational loyalty points remain the same, the Prevailing Loyalty will drop due to recalculation of the Base Loyalty.
Example of the Effects on Loyalty of Changing MembershipAs an established covenant that has existed for many decades, Semita Errabunda has acquired 38 loyalty points through familiarity (the maximum they can get this way), which are added to their Base Loyalty of –38. Due to their specialists, they have an extra 18 loyalty points (for a total of 18), giving them a Prevailing Loyalty of +2. Should the covenant recruit more covenfolk, the effects of Familiarity will be reduced, because the new covenfolk will not be habituated to the magi’s Gifts. If the number of covenfolk is doubled through recruitment, the 38 loyalty points from familiarity are diluted by one-half to 19, which, when added to the Base Loyalty (–38) and the specialist bonus (18), gives a net total of –1 loyalty points, which yields a Prevailing Loyalty of zero. What would happen if they recruited a new magus with the Blatant Gift instead of all those new covenfolk? In that case, the Base Loyalty would be recalculated to –(225 + 105) / 7 = –47. The covenant would retain its accumulated 38 loyalty points from familiarity, and 18 from specialists, so they would have a total of nine loyalty points, translating to a Prevailing Loyalty score of one. The addition of this new magus would shake the resolve of the covenfolk, but not so much that they would start to display disloyalty. |
Decreasing Loyalty Due to Actions and Events
Unfortunately for magi, there are a number of ways loyalty points can be lost. The actions of the magi are the most serious determinants of faithfulness overall, but any event that adversely affects the covenant is likely to be blamed on them, and result in a dip in Prevailing Loyalty. The following sections and the accompanying table describe five categories of Loyalty Point loss: attitude, punishments, wounds, local events, and reputations.
Example Loyalty Point Penalties
|
Attitude
Most covenfolk expect the magi at their covenant to be standoffish and haughty, just as commoners who live and work in more mundane settings expect their employers and the nobility to behave. This general attitude on the part of a covenant’s magi does not cause any particular difficulty, but more extreme attitudes can affect Prevailing Loyalty. The precise penalties are enumerated in the “Example Loyalty Point Penalties” box. The listed penalty is applied for each magus who acts in the described fashion, even to a single servant, gossip being what it is. (Multiple penalties are not assessed for the behavior of a single magus, however. Only the most severe penalty applies.)
Table Entries: Some magi are deliberately rude to mundanes, or worse, act as if they were completely oblivious to their presence even when addressed directly. More serious is the magus who considers the covenfolk to be tools, or is directly malicious towards them. A callous disregard for the covenfolk consists of treating them like livestock rather than human beings. Deliberate cruelty covers matters such as vivisection of animals, or making the covenfolk the targets of spells. Heinous malfeasance consists of actively evil and cruel acts performed out of sheer malice on a regular basis.
Punishment
Punishments which are not physical in nature have little effect on dependability (save where they are evidence of a magus’s Attitude, as above), and appropriate punishment inflicted by a turb captain, steward, or chamberlain has no effect either. However, if a magus orders that a resident of the covenant should be punished, then a penalty is applied according to the table. In a covenant with a positive Prevailing Loyalty score, punishment must be unjust to incur a penalty; in other cases, the attitude of the covenfolk is affected whether the punishment is justified or not. The penalty to loyalty points is modified by any Reputation that the victim has: If dearly loved, add the Reputation to the penalty; if they are known to be insolent or disliked by many, then the penalty is reduced by the character’s Reputation instead.
Table Entries: A minor humiliation is short-lived and of little consequence, such as a slap in the face.A magical humiliation that is not witnessed by others is also treated as minor. Public humiliation — being dressed down in front of the whole turb, for example, or afflicted with ass’s ears for Sun duration — has a larger effect. Restraint combines humiliation with physical deprivation — a day in the stocks, for example, or a week on half rations. Direct infliction of pain that results in no actual damage has an even more severe Loyalty Poing effect, but brutal punishment that inflicts prolonged or extensive pain and wounds its victim as well is judged even more harshly. Worst of all for morale are instances where the magus responsible for the punishment also clearly enjoys inflicting it.
Wounds
Any wound dealt directly to one of the covenfolk by a magus causes a Loyalty Point penalty, whether or not it was accidental. This penalty compounds a punishment penalty if the magus himself administers it. If the wound is inflicted by magic, it is treated as one category more severe.
Grogs are expected to be injured in the defense of the covenant, and the circumstances of the injury are more important in these cases. If the actions that caused the wound were not deliberate, the loyalty point penalty is halved. As before, a wound inflicted by magic is treated as one category more severe; increase the severity before halving the number of points if the wound was not inflicted deliberately.
The death of a well-liked member of the covenant can be a more serious blow to morale whether accidental, deliberate, magical, or not. Further, any positive Reputation possessed by a deceased character adds to the loyalty point penalty.
Local Events
Magi are frequently blamed for events outside of their control. When crops fail, a winter is exceptionally cruel, or the king declares war, then morale drops. In times of epidemic disease or famine, bonds of devotion may be severed entirely. These penalties do not disappear when the local event resolves itself, unless the magi had something to do with that resolution (see below). If these events last for years loyalty points continue to erode, although not necessarily at the same rate.
Table Entries: Minor hardship is equivalent to a single harsh winter. A severe hardship might be provoked by a poor harvest, which has a continuing effect for a whole year. A tragic event involves anumber of deaths due to a local catastrophe such as an uprising, a landslide, or the like. Prolonged hardship is caused by a succession of low-yield harvests or harsh winters, which gradually kill off the weak, the sick, and the old. Widespread hardship is both prolonged and large in scale, such as when a whole region suffers severe famine or drought. Many people may die, but this occurs over a long period of time and in a process of gradual erosion, rather than all at once. In contrast, a devastating event is one where many locals die within a short time span. A lethal plague or war is likely to cause this most severe dip in Prevailing Loyalty.
Reputation
When a covenant develops a bad Reputation and the covenfolk are aware of it, they may reconsider their employment. The covenant loses five Loyalty Loints for every point of each such Reputation.
Increasing Loyalty Due to Actions and Events
Fortunately for magi, covenants can gain as well as lose loyalty points by actions and events, increasing their Prevailing Loyalty. The five sections below — familiarity, altruism, rewards, local events, and reputation — describe the ways this can happen.
Familiarity
Covenfolk gradually grow used to the magi with whom they live; more specifically, they grow to ignore the social penalty of The Gift. This only applies to the magi of the home covenant; ”foreign” Gifted individuals suffer the usual suspicion and distrust. Over longer periods of time, covenfolk are born into the covenant and grow up familiar with their magi. For every year that a covenant exists it gains two loyalty points. The maximum number of loyalty points that can be gained from familiarity is the quantity necessary to offset the covenant’s negative Base Loyalty (that is, the penalty arising from the Gifts of the covenant’s magi).
Altruism
Direct acts of altruism towards covenfolk increase their devotion. These need to be performed personally by the magi — ordering a companion to heal a grog will not help! However, personally assisting with the healing of a wound causes a Loyalty Point gain equal to the equivalent penalty if the magus had inflicted the wound in the first place. Conspicuous use of magic in such altruistic acts increases the bonus to the next level. Similarly, a magus who suffers a wound on behalf of a mundane earns loyalty points equal to those that would have been lost had the mundane sustained the wound. Acts that directly benefit covenfolk in other ways also increase loyalty points, by an amount determined by the storyguide using roughly the same scale.
Rewards
Covenants who provide rewards for their covenfolk increase their allegiance. A one-off celebration after a notable event earns one Loyalty Point; a regular cycle of feast-days, with at least four major events each year, also grants one point a year, but costs the covenant wealth (see Chapter 5: Wealth, Expenditure).
Local Events
Prevailing Loyalty is not affected if the covenant prospers unless this is clearly due to the direct action of the magi, such as casting ritual spells on the crops, publicly intervening in a war, or curing a plague. In such cases, calculate the penalty that would have been imposed if these events had occurred and grant it as a bonus to loyalty points instead. (This may, of course, simply cancel out the effects of a penalty that arose when the events occurred in the first place.)
Reputation
If a covenant gains a good Reputation in the local area, and the covenfolk get to hear about it or otherwise benefit from it, then five loyalty points are gained for every point of the Reputation.
Loyalty and Mentem Magic
Magi can increase the reliability of their covenfolk directly with Mentem spells. There are three main methods: Creo Mentem can instill feelings of devotion in those who have no opinion of the magi; Rego Mentem can cause disloyal covenfolk to become loyal; and Rego Mentem can also force covenfolk to obey, whatever their emotions.
While individuals can be affected with relative ease in the short term, for these spells to affect Prevailing Loyalty they must be powerful and regularly used, and such severe measures mean Warping.
Instant Loyalty of the Rebellious TurbCrMe 50 R: Voice, D: Year, T: Group, Ritual Often cast at a midwinter gathering of the covenant under the pretense of a celebration, this ritual spell warps the perceptions of up to 100 people, granting them a ”Loyal to Covenant” score of +4. This Personality Trait overrides the regular rules for Prevailing Loyalty; it is not affected by living conditions or magus actions. The spell inflicts one Warping Point immediately when it first affects a character, five Warping Points over the course of the year, and five additional Warping Points for every subsequent year the character remains under its effects. After a year under the effects of this spell, each covenfolk affected will therefore have a Warping Score of 1, and acquire either the Simple-Minded or Short Attention Span Flaw as his first Minor Flaw. (Base 4, +2 Voice, +4 Year, +2 Group, +2 Size) |
Loyalty Versus Discipline
Some covenants implement stiff regimes of discipline and do not concern themselves with loyalty. A rigorous program of punishment is likely to cause Loyalty Point loss, but a corresponding increase in overall discipline as covenfolk attempt to avoid future punishment. Conversely, an over-indulgent council that lavishes their staff with money or drink might improve their sense of devotion, but damage their tendency to carry out their orders.
If appropriate, Prevailing Discipline may be tracked in an identical way to Prevailing Loyalty. Each action that would normally affect loyalty points should be judged according to the effects that it has on both Loyalty and Discipline, and applied where appropriate. Maintaining Prevailing Discipline requires all specialists managing the covenfolk to use Leadership rather than their Profession Ability to maintain order. If Prevailing Discipline is tracked separately from Prevailing Loyalty, then it may modify rolls related to the duties of the covenfolk. For example, Prevailing Discipline may adjust the Awareness of grogs on watch. However, keeping track of Discipline Points separately from loyalty points is more complicated, and should only be considered where the two are dramatically different.
Stories Caused by Prevailing LoyaltyA covenant with a Prevailing Loyalty score of –3 or less is prone to periodic crises of faithfulness, which will create stories that force player characters to patch up relationships. Most of these crises will be minor: perhaps a disgruntled servant makes a confession to a priest regarding his employers, or complains to the local lord. The covenant might lose covenfolk each year to desertion, or be constantly subjected to poor harvests and low productivity. Occasionally, a major crisis will occur, provoking a story that the magi must deal with immediately — the bishop decides to investigate rumors he’s heard, for example, or the local lord decides to rid his land of the sorcerers. A low Prevailing Loyalty therefore acts like a Hook, and may be resolved like any other Hook, through stories and events which add loyalty points. |
Attribution
Attribution Based on the material for Ars Magica, ©1993-2024, licensed by Trident, Inc. d/b/a Atlas Games®, under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International license 4.0 ("CC-BY-SA 4.0"). Ars Magica Open License Logo ©2024 Trident, Inc. The Ars Magica Open License Logo, Ars Magica, and Mythic Europe are trademarks of Trident, Inc., and are used with permission. Order of Hermes, Tremere, Doissetep, and Grimgroth are trademarks of Paradox Interactive AB and are used with permission.