The Code of Hermes and Undead.

(OOC: The Code of Hermes is not that complex but the Perifial Code which contains rulings, intepretations and precedences are several tomes and is really complex.

No the part about vampires was not in the original Code, it was added after House Tremere fell. Here is the original Code of Hermes:

I, Bonisagus, hereby swear my everlasting loyalty to the Order of Hermes and its members.

I will not deprive nor attempt to deprive any member of the Order of his magical power. I will not slay nor attempt to slay any member of the Order except in justly executed and formally declared Wizard's War. I hereby understand that Wizard's War is an open conflict between two magi who may slay each other without breaking this oath, and that should I be slain in a Wizard's War, no retribution shall fall on he who slays me.

I will abide by the decisions made by fair vote at the Tribunal. I will have one vote at the Tribunal, and I will use it prudently. I will respect as equal the votes of all others at the Tribunal.

I will not endanger the Order through my actions. Nor will I interfere with the affairs of mundanes and thereby bring ruin upon my sodalis. I will not deal with devils, lest I imperil my souls of my sodalis as well. I will not molest the faeries, lest their vengeance catch my sodalis also.

I will not use magic to scry upon members of the Order of Hermes, nor shall I use it to peer into their affairs.

I will train apprentices who will swear to this Code, and should any of them turn against the Order and my sodalis, I shall be the first to strike them down and bring them to justice. No apprentice of mine shall be called magus until he first swears to uphold this Code.

I concede to Bonisagus the right to take my apprentice if he should find my apprentice valuable to him in his studies.*

I shall further the knowledge of the Order and share with its members all that I find in my search for wisdom and power.**

I request that, should I break this oath, I be cast out of the Order. If I am cast out, I ask my sodalis to find me and slay me that my life may not continue in degradation and infamy.

The enemies of the Order are my enemies. The friends of the Order are my friends. The allies of the Order are my allies. Let us work as one and grow hale and strong.

This oath I hereby swear on the third day of Pisces, in the nine hundred and fifth year of Aries. Woe to they who try to tempt me to break this oath, and woe to me if I succumb to the temptation.

This is the newer version Hermetics swear to today:

I swear everlasting loyalty to the Order and its members. The Order's enemies and friends are my enemies and friends, and I shall not spurn a friend nor succor an enemy.

I shall not through action or inaction endanger the Order, nor consort with devils or undead, nor anger the fae.

I shall not deprive any Order mage of magickal power nor through action or inaction attempt to bring harm to an Order mage, except in justly declared and open certamen.

I shall not spy by any means or manners upon another Order's mages private works, nor read an Order mage's mind, nor invade or observe another Order mage's sanctum, save to guard against a clear, direct, forceful and imminent threat to the safety of the Order.

If called before a Tribunal, I shall abide by its verdicts. If called to sit on a Tribunal, I shall vote wisely, respect the vote of others, and support the Tribunal's verdicts.

Upon reaching the fifth degree or higher, I shall train apprentices and instruct them in this Code. I bear the entire responsibility for my apprentices and shall duly admonish, restrain, discipline, or arrest an apprentice who endangers the Order, and shall yield same apprentice to the Order's lawfully appointed agent or Tribunal.

I solemnly swear to uphold this sacred Code of Hermes, and venture any risk or sacrifice to protect it. Should I breach it, may all mages of the Order rise as one united and hunt me down and destroy me forevermore

I solemnly swear to vigourosly and actively pursue the Enemies of Ascension and to unmake their works in this world and all others.

The point about Undead was put under Infernalism after House Tremere fell. Now as for Shawn. Now this is not in any of the books but since several of the books DO HAVE vampire custos for Chantries, including Chantries where Hermetics are residents I thought some logic had to be added here for where you have shared Tradition Chantries.

The Chief would not himself be able to take a vampire as a Custos, however it is not illegal for him to be a member of a Chantry that do, nor speak with a Custos at the Chantry as that would be somewhat impractical. The same with demons, sicne many Traditions have no problems with dealing what the Order could see as demons, when in multi Tradition Chantries you just can not make it illegal for them to have members who summon demons at their Chantry.

My ruling on this is that you can be a part of a Chantry that have a vampire as a Custos and you can speak with a Custos at your Chantry, but you can not take such a Custos yourself or interact with non Custos undead.

Also the Chief do not control the Chantry aone, he is a member of a Decon Council and Steelhaven is not a purely Hermetic Chantry. Some leeway have to be given or Hermetics would not be able to work with other Traditions, so your Hollower Cabalmate works with Ghosts so you have to leave the Chantry that would not make sense.)

Not to mention that without a proper definition of undead the Order would not be able to interact with half of the Euthanathos who do Seekings though death that they return from. Not to mention what if your Etherite Cabalmate have basically something like Frankensteins Monster as a servant or for that matter what if you meet actual Frankenstein's Monster who is a member of the Sons of Ether. Some logic have to be used here, and luckily the Order have the Perifial Code for that.

So, while the original parts were written in c787 AD, they've been edited since then?

As for the 'Shawn issue' - I bet a skilled Quaestitor 'prosecutor' could find precedent both supporting and attacking the 'defence' you submit [which was the whole point I was making]. And yes, he could use the loophole that it's not technically him allowing his entry to the Chantry - to the extent he is conveniently 'absent'/'late' for the Deacon meeting where it's discussed [if he has a veto, that is].

Though like many of these things [such as the Traditions, Litany etc] the final judgement isn't on the rule(s) themselves, but the status and how much clout the accused possesses.

However, the fact it's a mixed Tradition Chantry means 'oversight' is actually stronger. A pure Hermetic chantry could get riddled with Code violations with others being none the wiser [due to the seniors gagging their juniors] but a mixed one the truth would get out for the non-Hermetics may 'let slip' [not knowing they were violations] which gets back to Quaestitor's ears.

At least, how I read it...

The first vesion was written by Bonisagus at the start of the Order, the second was written if I remember it right shortly before the Order joined the Traditions.

That is what precedence is there for, once precedence is set, that is how the law is to be interpented. The thing is that unless leeway is given for undead who are members of the the Traditions or serve them as Custos it would be impossible for Hermetics to be a member of multi Tradition Chantries. For example Hollow Ones works with ghosts rather extensively, Cultists, Euthanathos and Hollowers often have vampire friends, allies and Custos. It makes sense that there have been rulins on this allowing contact with undead that are Custos of non Hermetic members of a joined Chantry, and this is what we have gone with in this game. I have decided it makes sense that there have been rulings allowing this and gone with it.

Now even the order is not consistent with this as many Hermetics do work with ghosts and there are a few lich members of the Order, no one have ever been punished for becoming a lich. The Order also have necromancers who per definition deal with the undead.

It is not about how easy it is to get away with Code violations it is that it is not POSSIBLE to live in a Chantry where it is illegal for you to talk with some of the Custos so it makes a sense that a ruling have been made on this as it have on allot of things where the Code makes it hard for Hermetics to function.

Oversight is largely a matter of who you know and who your enemies are and how much they are able to pay attention to things outside what they are trying to do, so in part in depends on the density of the mages in the area.  In our game, we're under the baleful eye of some Hermetics at Lux Iternis that some of the IC characters think is playing loose with the rules due to personal biases. Problem is that one is also next in line to be Enforcers and the other is up on Horizon - and so, yes, the potential for abuse is there and easier for them to cover it up over at their all-Hermetic chantry, amongst friends and people that they know. And to expose any notion of that via the law the characters need an airtight defense, which they know and strangely the 'evidence' seems to be a target. There is definitely something going on but outright pointing a finger at them will get their heads on a very literal chopping block. It's possible someone with an ax to grind and a knowledge of law, and allies can give someone a real hard time (it already has in fact). Also in our game, some of the uppers are more brand-happy and gilgul-happy - there are a range of punishments from minor censures to that, and so something might earn some minor censures. Reputation is important and can carry some, or it can mean that you're always getting the worst end of it. Currently with the fact the cabal has pissed in the potential plans of the D'angelo's, they are in an uneasy position.

Re: the dead, this interpretation is really the only one that makes sense. I have been assuming Adley cannot take a vampire as his own custos (and probably wouldn't want to anyway) and will have to vote no on the cabal's in-vote with the caveat told to the others that he can't vote yes, or he'll have to abstain. But the cabal could outvote him and his vote would be on the ledger, and thereby satisfy the code. He is not too happy about the way that Shawn was brought in, in that it was a worry, but he was a traumatized victim - possibly it can be discussed and verified as removing a powerful tool from the hands of the enemy without further damaging them.  But that's one reason why he was so adamant about getting the papers in order asap, even if it seems bureaucratic bs. Delay could mean more trouble.

Oversight is largely a matter of who you know and who your enemies are and how much they are able to pay attention to things outside what they are trying to do, so in part in depends on the density of the mages in the area. In our game, we're under the baleful eye of some Hermetics at Lux Iternis that some of the IC characters think is playing loose with the rules due to personal biases. Problem is that one is also next in line to be Enforcers and the other is up on Horizon -

Indeed so. Well one is the Senior Quesitor of the Boston Tribunal and the other is a persecutor on Horizon both of them are in high places so one would need pretty hefty evidence to move against them.

and so, yes, the potential for abuse is there and easier for them to cover it up over at their all-Hermetic chantry, amongst friends and people that they know. And to expose any notion of that via the law the characters need an airtight defense, which they know and strangely the 'evidence' seems to be a target. There is definitely something going on but outright pointing a finger at them will get their heads on a very literal chopping block. It's possible someone with an ax to grind and a knowledge of law, and allies can give someone a real hard time (it already has in fact).

Pretty much yes.

Also in our game, some of the uppers are more brand-happy and gilgul-happy - there are a range of punishments from minor censures to that, and so something might earn some minor censures. Reputation is important and can carry some, or it can mean that you're always getting the worst end of it. Currently with the fact the cabal has pissed in the potential plans of the D'angelo's, they are in an uneasy position.

Basically how higher up mages behave and how strict and draconian the law is very a bit from setting to setting. In 1 and 2 edition which we are using it is very clear that game creators tried to mimic Vampire by having powerful elders with all the powers and step wrong and they will get you. Branding is a fairly common punishment, torture called ordeal is not uncommon, the Traditions are ruled buy guys who are centuries old and so are most Chantries. Gilgul of Tradition members is very rare, there have been around 60 since Heylel, but the Traditions do Gilgul what Fallen they can capture. In our game we are in a bit of a unique situation in that the Fallen have been active, a bit to active than they should be realistically but I went with it anyway, the Nephandi are usually working in the shadows you can have a whole story peeling of layer after layer and then find one Nephandus with an escape plan at the end, so actually finding Fallen to Gilgul other than unfortunate widderslainte children are rare.

The we have Revised in this setting Mage society is in dissaray, the Rouge Council have taken over since the Council of Nine are all either dead, lost in the Umbra or fled, the Traditions are in open war and this have made justice even more brutal though it is now less of the elders doling it out on the younger magi and more just battle field efficiency.

The we have the past end of the world setting that are one of the settings presented in M20, the Council are younger and some of the class differences are less though the Traditions can still be quite cruel with it justice some part of it is more fair. So yeah we do play in the most unfair setting, the older magi rule from their Umbral realms and justice is harsh.

Re: the dead, this interpretation is really the only one that makes sense. I have been assuming Adley cannot take a vampire as his own custos (and probably wouldn't want to anyway) and will have to vote no on the cabal's in-vote with the caveat told to the others that he can't vote yes, or he'll have to abstain. But the cabal could outvote him and his vote would be on the ledger, and thereby satisfy the code. He is not too happy about the way that Shawn was brought in, in that it was a worry, but he was a traumatized victim - possibly it can be discussed and verified as removing a powerful tool from the hands of the enemy without further damaging them. But that's one reason why he was so adamant about getting the papers in order asap, even if it seems bureaucratic bs. Delay could mean more trouble.

I agree that is the only way it would make sense for it to work at least to me.

Look at it this way, most Traditions allow for indentured servants or straight up slaves, the Order for example own their apprentices. However Dreamspeaker law say they can not take slaves of any kind and will not tolerate being so taken either. In fact the whole Tradition in the M20 setting have informed the Council that if even a single member of their group are ever given indentured servitude as a punishment the whole Tradition will walk. However if a Dreamspeaker is to live in a Chantry with other magi, there is a chance someone who is an indentured servant, a slave or a Hermetic with apprentice will also live there, and they can not go punishing their own members for having communal lunch if John the Hermetic apprentice helped cook it even if all Hermetic apprentices technically speaking are owned by their Mentors, some leeway have to be given. It also would make little sense if Adley could not speak to Shawn, I mean if Shawn are sent with an important message or something else important for the function of the Chantry it would be a bit of a trouble if Adley just had to leave the room every time the boy entered.

Now this is open to intepretation but I inteprent it that a Hermetic can interact with the undead Custos of another Chantry member but they can not have such a Custos themselves.

...The scariest person in the Order would be an old, shrewd Quaesitor subscribing to r/MaliciousCompliance...

Hehehe yeah.

The OoH books make it clear that while the interpretations/appendices of the Code have grown akin to Anglo common law, unlike said law 'precedent' is not binding, nor does new precedent remove the old one either. Therefore, the Tribunal can decide to run on whatever precedent it likes - or make it's own. This also means that I suspect 'full-dress' Tribunals [with several members] can end up more akin to an Anglo trial - with both sides citing various interpretations/precedents, arguing over definitions of words etc.

Naturally, this flexibility allows for abuse. A Master will get a 'better' trial than an Apprentice, simply from the fact chances are they'll have favours to call in, be able to find a legal 'defender' etc - and the tacit threat to those who back 'the opposition' that if the Master goes free, they'll be in a world of crap. At the most senior levels, a Quaestitor may even be scared of trying to bring charges as it might destroy their career/life. Conversely, an Apprentice who nobody really likes is much more likely to be railroaded - esp if the offended senior 'has a private word' with the Tribune before the trial.

Which means, like Warp said one of the most dangerous characters in a Hermetic chronicle would be a skilled, well-connected and senior Quaestitor who doesn't hesitate to use the law as a weapon...

It is not about how easy it is to get away with Code violations it is that it is not POSSIBLE to live in a Chantry where it is illegal for you to talk with some of the Custos so it makes a sense that a ruling have been made on this as it have on allot of things where the Code makes it hard for Hermetics to function.

The law does not have to make sense. Or be fair. And perhaps the rule was last updated after the Tremere 'incident' and the writer saw no reason why a vampire would be in a Hermetic chantry period? As the book says, 'consort' and 'undead' are grey areas...

The main 'defence' against a maliciously compliant Quaestitor [as Strife says they've attracted] is in fact the likes of the Chief etc has the contacts/clout to defend - with the implicit threat that Old Man Steelhaven might even get involved [who must have massive amount of clout if needs be]. But it's perfectly possible that there is a few previous interpretations which support a work-around/loophole - such as Shawn being made technically a member of another Tradition [at junior Sorcerer rank], thus making him a kind of 'honourary Mage' and therefore 'not undead' [as 'rank trumps mortal status']

Just my thoughts on this.

Anyway, this leads me to wonder; if say Nicole broke any of the Protocols, who would try her? Would she have the right/expectation that she'd be handed over to the Ethics Council [so she's 'tried by her own'?]

Which means, like Warp said one of the most dangerous characters in a Hermetic chronicle would be a skilled, well-connected and senior Quaestitor who doesn't hesitate to use the law as a weapon...

This is a problem the cabal has with the D'Angelo twins currently. They have been working with and currying favors with the decent folks and those that are neutral (sometimes to an equally awful degree, but at least they're not out to get them outright). A loophole in the writing of a verdict ended up nearly getting Beatrice gilguled, as the wording was not clear and was exploited. Another precedent saved her from being gilgulled, though the process had already been started, hence her poor state in the game currently.

If Nicole got caught breaking the Protocols, I'm fairly certain the prosecution would be cheerfully taken care of by one Vittoria D'Angelo, who would seize the opportunity to investigate the Cabal and the entire Chantry for any "deviations" she could use to execute the lot of us...

But let's keep in mind the Code of Hermes can be largely and safely treated as a "meh, not my problem" for most of us, while the Protocols are Bleedin' Serious Business.

The OoH books make it clear that while the interpretations/appendices of the Code have grown akin to Anglo common law, unlike said law 'precedent' is not binding, nor does new precedent remove the old one either. Therefore, the Tribunal can decide to run on whatever precedent it likes - or make it's own. This also means that I suspect 'full-dress' Tribunals [with several members] can end up more akin to an Anglo trial - with both sides citing various interpretations/precedents, arguing over definitions of words etc.

Precedent is not 100 percent binding but it is usually listened to and especially if not listening to it will cause allot of problems, for example sentencing a Hermetic who talk to a Cabalmate's undead Custos would make Hermetics leave multi Tradition Chantries in droves, or push out other traditionalists who deal with the undead and the Order can not have that. Also such a precedence do nto put aside anything in the Code it interpret it which you have to do for all the points.

Naturally, this flexibility allows for abuse. A Master will get a 'better' trial than an Apprentice, simply from the fact chances are they'll have favours to call in, be able to find a legal 'defender' etc - and the tacit threat to those who back 'the opposition' that if the Master goes free, they'll be in a world of crap. At the most senior levels, a Quaestitor may even be scared of trying to bring charges as it might destroy their career/life. Conversely, an Apprentice who nobody really likes is much more likely to be railroaded - esp if the offended senior 'has a private word' with the Tribune before the trial.

Yes this is absolutely true.

Which means, like Warp said one of the most dangerous characters in a Hermetic chronicle would be a skilled, well-connected and senior Quaestitor who doesn't hesitate to use the law as a weapon...

This is also true.

The law does not have to make sense. Or be fair. And perhaps the rule was last updated after the Tremere 'incident' and the writer saw no reason why a vampire would be in a Hermetic chantry period? As the book says, 'consort' and 'undead' are grey areas...

This is true however precedence are used to avoid situations where the Order just can not work with other Traditions, they tend to be rather practical and yes consort are rather gray a term which opens up for rulings that allow for you to ask what time it is from your Hollower Cabalmate's ghost friend.

The main 'defence' against a maliciously compliant Quaestitor [as Strife says they've attracted] is in fact the likes of the Chief etc has the contacts/clout to defend - with the implicit threat that Old Man Steelhaven might even get involved [who must have massive amount of clout if needs be]. But it's perfectly possible that there is a few previous interpretations which support a work-around/loophole - such as Shawn being made technically a member of another Tradition [at junior Sorcerer rank], thus making him a kind of 'honourary Mage' and therefore 'not undead' [as 'rank trumps mortal status']

This is true, Steelhaven have several politically powerful members. Jeffry are old, powerful and well respected and so is Master Steelhaven. Amadeus lead a Coven and is also quite old and powerful and Narim are Dante's apprentice. Absolutely a hostile Quesitor could try to stir up trouble, about several things, including Shawn but also the widderslainte and Anna. It is indeed possible to give Shawn more security by initiating him, the Order have a system for honorary members who do not have magic, and his Diceplies would be enough to make him count as a hedge wizard for other Traditions as he technically is, all supernaturals are. However by precedent talking to him once his is a Custos is fairly safe.

Also it say nowhere that a Traditionalist who is undead is not undead per definition of the Code, and there are undead Traditionalists for example Frankensteins Monster.

Anyway, this leads me to wonder; if say Nicole broke any of the Protocols, who would try her? Would she have the right/expectation that she'd be handed over to the Ethics Council [so she's 'tried by her own'?]

Well this depends on allot of factors.

A: Nicole do something that is not against the Protocols but are against the Sons of Ether's own laws, as each Tradition have their own in addition to the Protocols. In this case Nicole will be handed over to the Ethics Council as the Traditions at large have no say in it, she have not broken a Protocol. it is as if Adley should scry on a fellow Hermetic, he have not broken a Protocol but he have broken the Code and will be dealt with by Hermetics.

B: Nicole do something that breaks a Protocol, but the victim is another Etherite, let us say she punch a Professor in the face. Now she can be dealt with by a Traditionalist Tribunal but most likely she and the victim will demand the matter go before the Ethics Council, if both agree to try the case before an internal justice department it will be, but if they ask for it to be dealt with by a shared Tribunal that is also their right.

C: Nicole do something wrong against a member of another Tradition, this will be dealt with by a shared Tribunal, if serious enough or internally at the Chantry if it is a minor crime unless both demand the case be taken before a Tribunal. By that I mean that minor crimes most often are handled by the individual Chantries, let us say Nicole ignore safety warnings, build a machine that blows up and injures Henrietta, most likely she will be taken before the Deacon Council who will try the case. Now once their have made their decision both Nicole and Henrietta can decide to demand it be taken before a Tribunal instead but most accept the judgement of their Deacons provided it is fair. In such a case the judgement might be that Nicole have to cover all costs Henrietta had with healing, cover any damages to her property and take care of her apprentice until the Hollower are back on her feet.

D: Cases where the punishment can be Gilgul are always tried before the Council of Nine if the matter involve more than one Tradition or before the highest authority within a given Tradition if it involves only one, but let us hope Nicole never do a crime that serious.

It is also true that Vittoria D'Angelo would gladly put the entire Cabal on trial if she could and she would use any chance to do so. And yes the Code of Hermes is not important for anyone other than Hermetics, Jon for example can scry away at other mages all day if he want to, and while an older mage could potentially take him to trial for being rude anyone his own rank or lower can ward themselves but not claim he break any laws.

Precedent is not 100 percent binding but it is usually listened to and especially if not listening to it will cause allot of problems, for example sentencing a Hermetic who talk to a Cabalmate's undead Custos would make Hermetics leave multi Tradition Chantries in droves, or push out other traditionalists who deal with the undead and the Order can not have that. Also such a precedence do nto put aside anything in the Code it interpret it which you have to do for all the points.

Bet that whatever precedent can be found to back X, at least another precedent will say Y instead - so it'll be down to the Tribune(s) to decide which was right - or neither. But they're not bound to follow precedent like they are in Anglo legal systems. Though I bet there are a series of 'generally accepted precedents' such as definitions of terms like 'undead', 'demon' and so on which every Quaestitor is familiar with.

However, I do suspect Hermetic law has become more 'liberal' [ie less bloodthirsty] over the last couple of centuries, if nothing else due to 'outside opinion'. First, it wouldn't want to present such an unlikable face to the other Traditions, but also the Order wouldn't want to end up in a 'war of laws' with the leadership of non-Hermetic Chantries.

Also it say nowhere that a Traditionalist who is undead is not undead per definition of the Code and there are undead Traditionalists for example Frankensteins Monster.

True. But doesn't say 'an undead is undead regardless of position or standing with Traditions as a whole' either. Which is why I suggested 'honorary Mage' as a work-around, similar to the 'honorary White' used in apartheid South Africa.

The problem is that to initiate Shawn into the Order requires 'consorting' with an 'undead'. However, if Shawn was initiated into another Tradition he's then a member of the Traditions as a whole and can't be a nonperson without political... issues.

With trials, is it possible for say Nicole to turn herself in to the Ethics Council because she wanted to be tried for her Protocol-breaking [allegedly] by 'her peers' [who may be more sympathetic / owe her favours / etc] rather than the Traditions on the whole?

Anyway, if D'Angelo is a Quaestitor, they legally don't have a ounce of power on the non-Hermetics. In this case, I suspect the 'worst' they could do would document/fabricate the 'evidence' and send it to a senior member of their Chantry and/or Tradition [so one of the Deacons and/or Hadermann in Nicole's case].

Anyway, if D'Angelo is a Quaestitor, they legally don't have a ounce of power on the non-Hermetics. In this case, I suspect the 'worst' they could do would document/fabricate the 'evidence' and send it to a senior member of their Chantry and/or Tradition [so one of the Deacons and/or Hadermann in Nicole's case].

Vittoria D'Angelo is a Quaesitor, BUT, more importantly, she is the Senior Enforcer for the Boston Tribunal. So arguing that she doesn't have an ounce of power is sort of like telling a federal judge that he has no jurisdiction because you're a Sovereign Citizen...

Do you have claim against me? No, that's 'Nicole Bouchard', while I am FreePerson Nicole of the family Bouchard! I'm a Lawful Rebel! *smirks*

I'm not too familiar with Tribunals [as in Tradition ones]. Isn't that just a term of an ad hoc court formed by whatever senior mages they can find at that moment in time?

Bet that whatever precedent can be found to back X, at least another precedent will say Y instead - so it'll be down to the Tribune(s) to decide which was right - or neither. But they're not bound to follow precedent like they are in Anglo legal systems. Though I bet there are a series of 'generally accepted precedents' such as definitions of terms like 'undead', 'demon' and so on which every Quaestitor is familiar with.

However, I do suspect Hermetic law has become more 'liberal' [ie less bloodthirsty] over the last couple of centuries, if nothing else due to 'outside opinion'. First, it wouldn't want to present such an unlikable face to the other Traditions, but also the Order wouldn't want to end up in a 'war of laws' with the leadership of non-Hermetic Chantries.

Well you have two factions of the Quesitors, Traditionalists and Transitionalists, the former want to follow the exact wording of the law, while the latter want to follow the spirit of the law. A often used example is this. A Hermetic walk down the street and a demon pops up and says hey, the Hermetic says oh just go away and leave me alone. A Traditionalist will say she is guilty of dealing with demons as per the letter of the law she did make a deal with one, she asked it to go away and it did, while a Transitionalist will say that she is not guilty as clearly just asking a demon to get away from you is not the intention of said law.

What a demon is are a matter of HUGE controversy. Originally it was Christian demons, so no Demon the Fallen demons everything else is a go, then Asian Hermetics who are Shinto says all negative, aggressive spirits are demons, and Taoist ones have another opinion, and then there are those who would call all lower Umbral being demons. This have never fully been made clear but generally the consensus is Qlipothic spirits and Christian demons but there have been cases where Hermetics who have made deals with for example Yama Kings have been put on trial.

The same here the intention of the law against dealing with undead is clearly do not deal with Cainite vampires, do not get turn into a vampire and if you botch your fucking ritual and get turned into a vampire anyway do not make your whole house into vampires. The formation of Clan Tremere being the single worst loss of Avatars in WoD history. Speaking with ghosts or being a Necromancer are clearly not the intention of the law but a Traditionalist might still try to claim it is against the letter of it.

Former rulings are given pretty strong consideration though, so precedence are considered so for the most part having Shawn at the Chantry is pretty safe.

True. But doesn't say 'an undead is undead regardless of position or standing with Traditions as a whole' either. Which is why I suggested 'honorary Mage' as a work-around, similar to the 'honorary White' used in apartheid South Africa.

Someone can suggest that however the precedence are in Shawns favor so it should be safe. it is the same that the Order do not put their own necromancers on trial and that if anyone want to go against precedence Crexia is likely to show up and say hi Karen...did not we have tea last month? Well you had tea I did not as I am quite dead, so I assume you will have your trial next...oh you are moving for dismissing the case, oh splendid.

Shawn however would be much more protected as a honorary mage than as a Custos.

The problem is that to initiate Shawn into the Order requires 'consorting' with an 'undead'. However, if Shawn was initiated into another Tradition he's then a member of the Traditions as a whole and can't be a nonperson without political... issues.

It would create some ripples.

With trials, is it possible for say Nicole to turn herself in to the Ethics Council because she wanted to be tried for her Protocol-breaking [allegedly] by 'her peers' [who may be more sympathetic / owe her favours / etc] rather than the Traditions on the whole?

Yes it is possible, however if the crime concerned members of other Traditions the Sons of Ether protecting her and trying on their own would likely cause an inter Tradition incident and Nicole is not important enough for the political fallout of that. But for something that only concern Etherites then yes she have the right to be tried by her own.

Anyway, if D'Angelo is a Quaestitor, they legally don't have a ounce of power on the non-Hermetics. In this case, I suspect the 'worst' they could do would document/fabricate the 'evidence' and send it to a senior member of their Chantry and/or Tradition [so one of the Deacons and/or Hadermann in Nicole's case].

The title Quesitor carry no weight but they are Enforcers, each Tradition have them under different titles and they are trained to handle inter Tradition legal issues as well. For most issues though it will like I said be the offender's Chantry that handle the trial unless the accused demand to be tried before a Tribunal or the matter is very serious. Colin was accused of ehm...biting, an senior Mage, long story, he was sentenced to paying an amount of Tass in damages and write an apology letter, this hearing was done before the Chantry Deacons.

I'm not too familiar with Tribunals [as in Tradition ones]. Isn't that just a term of an ad hoc court formed by whatever senior mages they can find at that moment in time?

A Tribunal is a mage convention. Hermetic ones and joined ones with several different Traditions are called Tribunals, individual Traditions have their own names for them, they are held regularly, to discuss all sort of matters, share knowledge, cast spells and gossip with other mages. However when an issue need to be resolved, such as a crime one can be called somewhat quickly with a perciding Enforcer, an persecutor and defense for the accused. Minor crimes will usually be expected to wait until the next regular Tribunal is held, while high crimes call for emergency tribunals or sending the matter before the Council of Nine.

Tribunal is also a word used to mean a territory, so Boston and neighboring smaller cities and towns are the Boston Tribunal.

- It's more complex than basic 'Traditionalists' vs 'Modernists'. An individual Tribune may be 'Traditionalist' on one part of the code, but a 'Modernist' on another. Another aspect to consider is the 'Pragmatist' vs 'Idealist' scale; the former will be more willing to accept that circumstances matter [such as the fact three of the PC's have technically 'conspired with enemies...' by talking to Union members at the Port] while the latter doesn't give the flying about that, rules are rules and all that [which could veer into 'Lawful Stupid' territory]. Then there's personal issues in-play; that Judge #1 [say] thinks Nicole was 'too stupid' to have known it was wrong and reduces the punishment to a fine, Judge #2 convicts in a heartbeat for they're a prejudiced old fart, Judge #3 lets her off for they really don't like the accusers, #4 was effectively bribed to convict and so on...

- I mentioned the 'honorary Mage' option here for I know Nicole would be too stupid to suggest it IC. And Crexia might skirt around the 'undead' definition by the technical fact that she did not actually die - lichdom is [if I remember right] to hover on the cusp of it. But her main defence is a simple one: 'screw the rules; I have clout and power'. However, finding a non-Hermetic Master to effectively sponsor Shawn to join their Tradition might be the difficult bit...

- I can imagine most 'crimes' are dealt with by either the Deacons or by the accused Tradition superiors. Which in Nicole's case, is a good reason to keep on Hadermann's good side...

- Mage Convention? Can I go as Porthos? *smirks*

The title Quesitor carry no weight but they are Enforcers, each Tradition have them under different titles and they are trained to handle inter Tradition legal issues as well. For most issues though it will like I said be the offender's Chantry that handle the trial unless the accused demand to be tried before a Tribunal or the matter is very serious. Colin was accused of ehm...biting, an senior Mage, long story, he was sentenced to paying an amount of Tass in damages and write an apology letter, this hearing was done before the Chantry Deacons.

Well, now, "biting" is highly inaccurate. "Stabbing her Avatar and disrespecting her authority", on the other hand... but there was legal precedent justifying Colin's refusal to surrender to Vittoria's loving authority, so he pretty much got away with a figurative slap on the wrist.

- It's more complex than basic 'Traditionalists' vs 'Modernists'. An individual Tribune may be 'Traditionalist' on one part of the code, but a 'Modernist' on another. Another aspect to consider is the 'Pragmatist' vs 'Idealist' scale; the former will be more willing to accept that circumstances matter [such as the fact three of the PC's have technically 'conspired with enemies...' by talking to Union members at the Port] while the latter doesn't give the flying about that, rules are rules and all that [which could veer into 'Lawful Stupid' territory]. Then there's personal issues in-play; that Judge #1 [say] thinks Nicole was 'too stupid' to have known it was wrong and reduces the punishment to a fine, Judge #2 convicts in a heartbeat for they're a prejudiced old fart, Judge #3 lets her off for they really don't like the accusers, #4 was effectively bribed to convict and so on...

The distinction between Traditionalists and Transitionalists is pretty much where the distinction lies - Letter of the Law vs. Spirit of the Law. Traditionalists are highly predictable in their rulings, while Transitionalists may be counted on to consider extenuating circumstances, and their rulings may swing further in either direction. As for being bribed, I'm afraid neither faction is immune to that. Except Master Tolle. He'd be mortally offended and convict the person attempting to bribe him. In a separate trial.

Anja wrote:- I mentioned the 'honorary Mage' option here for I know Nicole would be too stupid to suggest it IC. And Crexia might skirt around the 'undead' definition by the technical fact that she did not actually die - lichdom is [if I remember right] to hover on the cusp of it. But her main defence is a simple one: 'screw the rules; I have clout and power'. However, finding a non-Hermetic Master to effectively sponsor Shawn to join their Tradition might be the difficult bit...

Somehow, I think finding a non-Hermetic Master for that would be easier than you might expect. Pretty sure Amadeus Nassa would absolutely LOVE the idea, if it meant pointing his nose at the Order of Hermes.

- I can imagine most 'crimes' are dealt with by either the Deacons or by the accused Tradition superiors. Which in Nicole's case, is a good reason to keep on Hadermann's good side...

Depends on the severity. If Darrian Haagen had decided to press charges against Tane for usurping command on a combat mission, it would probably have been dealt with by the Deacon Council first, as it was still an entirely in-Chantry affair, potentially elevated to a hearing in the Tribunal. If Master Dupuis, from Lux Iternis, had pressed the same charges against Tane, it would've gone straight to the Tribunal, as it would be between members of two different Chantries. Context, severity, and whether or not the offense crosses between Chantries and/or Traditions is highly relevant.

- Mage Convention? Can I go as Porthos? *smirks*

I'm sure you can, but if the real man shows up, don't be surprised if Nicole is dragged along to Horizon, because Porthos won't leave himself behind.
Better suggestion, go as Dante, and see how long it takes before the real McCoy shows up and gets confused, because he didn't realize he had another copy of himself then and there.

- It's more complex than basic 'Traditionalists' vs 'Modernists'. An individual Tribune may be 'Traditionalist' on one part of the code, but a 'Modernist' on another. Another aspect to consider is the 'Pragmatist' vs 'Idealist' scale; the former will be more willing to accept that circumstances matter [such as the fact three of the PC's have technically 'conspired with enemies...' by talking to Union members at the Port] while the latter doesn't give the flying about that, rules are rules and all that [which could veer into 'Lawful Stupid' territory]. Then there's personal issues in-play; that Judge #1 [say] thinks Nicole was 'too stupid' to have known it was wrong and reduces the punishment to a fine, Judge #2 convicts in a heartbeat for they're a prejudiced old fart, Judge #3 lets her off for they really don't like the accusers, #4 was effectively bribed to convict and so on...

The distinction between Traditionalists and Transitionalists is pretty much where the distinction lies - Letter of the Law vs. Spirit of the Law. Traditionalists are highly predictable in their rulings, while Transitionalists may be counted on to consider extenuating circumstances, and their rulings may swing further in either direction. As for being bribed, I'm afraid neither faction is immune to that. Except Master Tolle. He'd be mortally offended and convict the person attempting to bribe him. In a separate trial.

As Warp says with House Guernicus it really fall along two lines Traditionalists who value the letter of the law and Transitionalists who value the spirit of the law. Both of them can be strict or moderate, not all Traditionalists are more strict though they tend to be, but they think the wording of the law is what matter not the intent, so they would be against places like the Umbra Port being neutral territory, or the Spy's Demise who are also neutral territory while a Transitionalist will think that the point about conspire not with the enemies of Ascension should not include asking a Technocrat where is the loo in a neutral space, they might also argue what lie in the word conspire while Traditionalists are more likely to condemn all contact between Traditionalists and enemy factions.

Non Guernicus Enforcers though will not be as split between such lines, and things will be more spread out. And yes Master Tolle would have you up on charges if you tried to bribe him.

Well, now, "biting" is highly inaccurate. "Stabbing her Avatar and disrespecting her authority", on the other hand... but there was legal precedent justifying Colin's refusal to surrender to Vittoria's loving authority, so he pretty much got away with a figurative slap on the wrist.

Vittoria learned not to paw at Mia.

I mentioned the 'honorary Mage' option here for I know Nicole would be too stupid to suggest it IC. And Crexia might skirt around the 'undead' definition by the technical fact that she did not actually die - lichdom is [if I remember right] to hover on the cusp of it. But her main defence is a simple one: 'screw the rules; I have clout and power'. However, finding a non-Hermetic Master to effectively sponsor Shawn to join their Tradition might be the difficult bit...

Most would consider a lich to be rather undead. As for Shawn I doubt many of the NPCs would suggest it as they have precedence on their side so having him at the Chantry should be fine but one of the other player characters could do so.

Hermetic lichdom are done this way:

First sever all links you have to everything, kill your familiar, distance yourself from all friend, destroy all enchantments you have ever made, cleanse all arcane connections you must have no link to the world.

Make your lichdom potion which use your personal longevity potion along with Primium and other ingredients, you are left with a blue liquid.

Make a Primium dagger by forging your own weight in silver reducing it until you have a dagger.

Drink the potion then slit open your veins with the dagger and let yourself bleed out. If you have done things correctly you will wake up again as a lich, your Avatar will merge with your body, your potion replace your blood and you are now just about indestructible, you can not reach Ascension though, you are pretty much stuck that away forever and you also become very, very static.

I can imagine most 'crimes' are dealt with by either the Deacons or by the accused Tradition superiors. Which in Nicole's case, is a good reason to keep on Hadermann's good side...

No low crimes that only affect a given Chantry are dealt with in Chantry unless the accused demand a Tribunal. Major Crimes that affect only the accursed Tradition are dealt with by the Enforcers of that mage's given Tradition. Major crimes that affect someone of another Tradition are dealt with at a Tribunal.

Mage Convention? Can I go as Porthos? *smirks*

Yes both Porthos might show up, think you are a Hobgoblin and think Forces 6 is the way to deal with that issue.

Somehow, I think finding a non-Hermetic Master for that would be easier than you might expect. Pretty sure Amadeus Nassa would absolutely LOVE the idea, if it meant pointing his nose at the Order of Hermes. Razz

He really would love that.

Depends on the severity. If Darrian Haagen had decided to press charges against Tane for usurping command on a combat mission, it would probably have been dealt with by the Deacon Council first, as it was still an entirely in-Chantry affair, potentially elevated to a hearing in the Tribunal. If Master Dupuis, from Lux Iternis, had pressed the same charges against Tane, it would've gone straight to the Tribunal, as it would be between members of two different Chantries. Context, severity, and whether or not the offense crosses between Chantries and/or Traditions is highly relevant.

This.

I'm sure you can, but if the real man shows up, don't be surprised if Nicole is dragged along to Horizon, because Porthos won't leave himself behind. Razz
Better suggestion, go as Dante, and see how long it takes before the real McCoy shows up and gets confused, because he didn't realize he had another copy of himself then and there.

Hehehehe.

While the 'letter vs spirit' is an important divider, I'd also say the 'idealist vs pragmatist' is too; it's perfectly possible, for example for an individual Tribune to loathe 'innovations' [aka different interpretations of the law] of any kind, but to also accept that the Rules don't allow for every eventuality, that it's possible for them to conflict, it deals with fallible human beings and there's occasions where disobeying a law is in fact the correct action.

Anyway, unless Crexia is the only lich in the whole Order ever I suspect they've either been grandfathered in and/or have an note in the margin of a law book somewhere saying that they're legally alive or something...

Idealist vs. Pragmatist is a better split for advocates than judges.
You do NOT want a judge to look at the case from either an idealistic or pragmatic angle, just from the point of the law, whether the letter of it, or the intent of it.

And part of what saved Colin after his latest dispute with Vittoria D'Angelo was that one of the charges against him was unenforceable due to there being no precedent for the actual situation, and no law dealing with interacting with a non-Fallen ex-Nephandus to combat a Fallen foe... the Enforcers (not just Quaesitors) do convene occasionally to review and revise where needed, to plug holes and ensure consistent applications of law.

Well, there's no formal system for picking Tribunes, is there? So it's possible that any Traditionalist who's at Master rank [or beyond] is roped in to serve at some point; be it for their Tradition, for their Chantry or the Traditions in general. Esp. if a quick decision and/or a 'panel' is needed and the main criteria for inclusion is 'you're here and you weren't quick or smart enough to get out of it'. And Awakened society is just too small to maintain a fully professional legal system.

Lastly, you do want your judge to have some pragmatism - for if nothing else, to not end up in 'Lawful Stupid' territory...

And if there was no precedent to cover that situation and nothing to realistically to extrapolate from, technically that's not 'unenforceable' but 'no case to answer'.

Don't think it has to be Master rank, just someone who decides to become an Enforcer.
Essentially, someone who pursues law and justice as their stock in trade.
Awakened society is more than large enough to maintain a fully professional legal system - though the bulk of that would be on Horizon.

And fair point, you want the judge a little pragmatic, but ultimately, the judge is supposed to be there to determine whether the law has been followed or not - too much pragmatism, and you could end up with a judge who just makes the case end in the manner that will cause the least long-term bother, regardless of who's in the right.

And the charge of "conspiring with Enemies of Creation" was unenforceable, since the status of Dalisse was not actually properly covered by law.
Not sure if it is yet; probably going to take years to decide...

While the 'letter vs spirit' is an important divider, I'd also say the 'idealist vs pragmatist' is too; it's perfectly possible, for example for an individual Tribune to loathe 'innovations' [aka different interpretations of the law] of any kind, but to also accept that the Rules don't allow for every eventuality, that it's possible for them to conflict, it deals with fallible human beings and there's occasions where disobeying a law is in fact the correct action.

There can be Quesitors and other Enforcers who have all sort of opinions, one that will break the law for their opinions, especially openly will be very rare but they are individuals and will have individual views. However the divide between the Traditionalists and Transitionalists withing House Guernicus is an actual faction divide that have been part of the House from the start.

Anyway, unless Crexia is the only lich in the whole Order ever I suspect they've either been grandfathered in and/or have an note in the margin of a law book somewhere saying that they're legally alive or something...

She is not the only lich and likely this have like I said been solved by precedence of the law, just as with vampire custos belonging to other Chantry members or dealing with other undead members of the Traditions such as for example Frankenstein's Monster.

Well, there's no formal system for picking Tribunes, is there? So it's possible that any Traditionalist who's at Master rank [or beyond] is roped in to serve at some point; be it for their Tradition, for their Chantry or the Traditions in general. Esp. if a quick decision and/or a 'panel' is needed and the main criteria for inclusion is 'you're here and you weren't quick or smart enough to get out of it'. And Awakened society is just too small to maintain a fully professional legal system.

Most of the Traditons have those who serve as Enforcers are they are the ones that will be chosen to serve as judges as Tribunals, for quick decisions as you say on not important matters the Deacon Council of a mage's Chantry will deal with it. If you take the time to call for a Tribunal you have the time to find an Enforcer.

Lastly, you do want your judge to have some pragmatism - for if nothing else, to not end up in 'Lawful Stupid' territory..

This happens allot.

And if there was no precedent to cover that situation and nothing to realistically to extrapolate from, technically that's not 'unenforceable' but 'no case to answer'.

If there is no precedence the preceding Quesitor will make a choice and that will make a precedent, if there is no case to be made then the accused go free.

Don't think it has to be Master rank, just someone who decides to become an Enforcer.
Essentially, someone who pursues law and justice as their stock in trade.
Awakened society is more than large enough to maintain a fully professional legal system - though the bulk of that would be on Horizon.

This.

And fair point, you want the judge a little pragmatic, but ultimately, the judge is supposed to be there to determine whether the law has been followed or not - too much pragmatism, and you could end up with a judge who just makes the case end in the manner that will cause the least long-term bother, regardless of who's in the right. Razz

Very true, most often the law and precedence are followed even when it is not pragmatic to do so.

And the charge of "conspiring with Enemies of Creation" was unenforceable, since the status of Dalisse was not actually properly covered by law. Razz
Not sure if it is yet; probably going to take years to decide...

Dalisse is not Fallen and she had left the Nephandi by her actions, as as such she could no longer be said to be an enemy of Ascension. It is like the former Iterator cyborg Hector, he is no longer an enemy of Ascension.