As to including "canon covenants," I'm currently attempting this, and it has issues. The Berklist is populated with sourcebook writers, and some of them want the ability to come up with new covenants as necessary to make a point, meaning a canonical list would be overly restrictive.

I think it should be possible to make points with less than a whole covenant, (Magus Exemplus of Hnchak and his friends, FrEx), but I've never written a sourcebook, so maybe I'm wrong.

Anyhoo, "Need a covenant? Make one!" seems to have been the policy for a while, and there are just too many covenants. *Three* "On the Border of the Ardennes, near Belgium", at least 8 in Novgorod...ignoring the fact that the DatB says there are only 6.

Mythic Seas is especially guilty of this, but there's some behind-the-scenes action there that's probably under a nondisclosure agreement, so maybe the high-ups don't consider it a problem.

The covenants are also decidedly non-uniform in distribution. The british isles are full, as is Provencal and Rome, but Iberia, Normandy, Rhine, and Transylvania are just wastelands. Novgorod is sparse, but it's supposed to be, and currently so are the Levant and the Greater Alps, but since there are books in the queue for those, I assume Atlas could fix that.

***************************

It is the line developer's job to hold writers to the grindstone. And its smething that desperately needs to be done.

I'd like to see a canonical listd developed of all established covenants and how many blank spaces in each Tribnal.And thats it. If you need a covenant either use one of the established ones or ta a blank space.

Heck, when Adam and I were writing The Mysteries we were requested by the then line developer to remove three covenants we mentioned because they contradicted with things in development. I had no problem with it. I was glad to get that sort of feedback. And that is the way it should be done.

Mythic Europe has got to start being treated as a whole. And one of the ways to do that is a little discipline about covenants and NPC magi.

Nothing wrong about using someone else's creation. It is a shared world. We you write fr a shared world you start with certain assumptions. Like a simple respect for wht came before.And a view towards cohesiveness.

Jere

Well, I agree with you on this one, Jeremiah. I think that deviating from the "canon" in regards to covenant placement should not only be allowed, but encouraged, but that the canon itself should keep using the same names over and over again...it generates the sense of community that an 800 strong continent wide society should have.

But certainly we've got to throw out some of the current "Canonicals." It's easier than it sounds, because we can posit a whole bunch of covenants disappearing between 1197 and 1220, as many are mentioned only in earlier editions. Blame the Vampire Purges. Or not.

But which ones to keep? The Domus Magnae, for certain.

I think that the throwaways used in WG and WGRE for Tribunal rulings should be kept, even though they're throwaways, because some serious thought went into those rulings. A careful reading reveals some interesting subtexts based on which covenant is in trouble when.
The only one I can remember right now is Hnchak (again!), and something along the lines of Semita Errabundae? Maybe they weren't as impressionable as I thought...

(I seem to recall a rumor that those were actually playtester covenants given undying infamy, but that's okay, as long as said playtesters don't complain when their covenants suddenly have new and different Magi demonstrating new rules or concepts in them...)
The tribunals in the Tribunal books seem top on the hierarchy. That covers less tribunals than books, though. Iberia was intentionally vague about its contents, after Barcelona, Duresca, Estancia-es-Karida, and one unnamed covenant in the Pyrenees where the Praeco is, the place is empty (Jaferiya being explicitly destroyed in WGRE). Same goes for Loch Leglean, but it claims the excuse that turnover there is high.

So Stonehenge, Rome, and Novgorod are full, as well as possibly Greater Alps and Levant.

We *could* fill Hibernia from the OoH, but its out of print, so we could also mix it up some, if desired.

Provencal can *mostly* be filled from the (also out of print) Mistridge supplement. (And the old Covenants supplement? I don't have that one)

What's left? Normandy, Rhine, Transylvania, Thebes. I happen to know someone very interested in the health of the game has written a complete Thebes tribunal supplement and put it online, but I don't know how using a public source would affect Atlas legally. The person in question probably wouldn't mind. :P

But if previous Covenant creation has been haphazard, future covenant (and tribunal) creation can be carefully thought out, and these are the Tribunals where I would most like to see that happen (Well, and Rome, but I'm too late on Rome) in a way that shows a cross-section of magi and leaves enough hooks for new ideas with familiar names.

What's excluded?

Adventure covenants. Ad Vis Per Veritas, Urania, Fengheld, Moonfield, the one in Bishop's Staff, *sniff* Calebais...but it was dead anyways.
I have no problem with future adventures continuing to introduce new covenants, if they play a large role in the story (as Bishop's Staff, for example), but not if they're periphery (Fengheld!?!). Even if doing so pushes the covenant count back up into the unrealistic range...they're adventures, "premade settings," and if we're going to encourage changing the setting to suit the storyguide (Which I think we should), then our own adventures should be allowed to do it when it's dramatically important.

Throwaways (Or in WGRE's case, *other* throwaways.) Lion's Gate has all of one line to itself "in the canon," and that in Mythic Seas. Of course, it sticks in my mind for that very reason, but that's no reason to keep it. The example magi in HoH tend to come from otherwise unmentioned covenants (although not always). These could easily have been randomly chosen from a list of more established covenants.

Then there's "Example covenants," such as the Abbey of St. Nerius for Pious Magi, the two Shamanic covenants in latvia and lithuania, Heorot in UT. These seem to be written for the sole purpose of giving their author a chance to write about a covenant. This is how Mythic Seas added a *slew* of covenants, as I mentioned, but I actually like *some* of them...Aquae Desilientes and Sinus Wodinis in particular, because they help define the borders of the Order. (I like Urania for the same reason, but that's neither here nor there). Interesting as some of them are, these are the Big Offenders in climbing covenant count.

Talking too much,
Fred.

How many covenants are there supposed to be in Normandy?
What are they?
What handy references are there pointing to these covenants?

I have crosschecked grimoire to mistridge and Iberia to Mysteries, but info on this region seems a little sparse.

In particular, I am interested in any information on Fudarus, including any known Magi to be found there.

I guess Mistridge and Windgraven don't count as they are provencal based aren't they?

I'm also struggling somewhat with the Greater Alps, but we are promised a book on that sometime in the future.

Lets see... Albision??? Lariander??? As the books concerned are out of print, I have no idea on the backstory of these covenants. Can anyone enlighten me?