Lily Character Sheet
From Ars Magica
Contents |
Characteristics
Intelligence 0
Perception -2 (near-sighted)
Strength +1 (toned)
Stamina +2 (vigorous)
Presence +1 (noble bearing)
Communication +1 (well-spoken)
Dexterity +3 (nimble)
Quickness +1 (spry)
Statistics
Age: 19
Warping: 5 (divine)
Decrepitude: 0
Virtues & Flaws
Virtues
- Landed Noble (major, social)
- Wealthy (major, general)
- Privileged Upbringing (minor, general)
- Well-Travelled (minor, general)
- Unaging (minor, supernatural)
- Improved Characteristics (minor, general)
Flaws
- Raised from the Dead (major, story, supernatural)
- Flaw from warping: Visions (minor, supernatural)
- Flaw from warping: Visions (minor, supernatural)
- Lost Love (minor, personality)
- Oath of Fealty: English crown (major, story, required)
- Compassionate (major, personality)
Personality Traits
Compassionate +3
Circumspect +1
Strong-willed +2
Abilities
General:
Speak Middle English (colloquialisms): 5
Speak Norman French (expansive vocabulary): 5
Area Lore (Shropshire): 2 (15)
Awareness (alertness): 2 (15)
Charm (quick wit): 2 (15)
Craft (knitting): 2 (15)
Etiquette (clergy): 2 (15)
Folk Ken (common folk): 3 (30)
Hunt (deer): 2 (15)
Leadership (inspiration): 2 (15)
Living Language: Welsh (conversational): 3 (30)
Ride (speed): 2 (15)
Academic:
Artes Liberales (grammar): 3 (30)
Civil and Canon Law (church): 1 (5)
Common Law (local laws): 2 (15)
Dead Language: Latin (academic): 4 (50)
Theology (history): 2 (20)
Martial:
Bow (Recurve): 4 (50)
Single Weapon (longsword and shield): 5 (75)
Combat Information
Burden=9, Encumbrance=1
Armor: Partial chainmail suit; Soak=8
Specially crafted recurve bow: Init: -2, Atk: +12, Dfn: +6, Dmg: +9
Longsword and heater shield: Init: +2, Atk: +13, Dfn: +11, Dmg: +7
Approval Notes
Manor/Fief
I'm willing to try the Noble virtues as you have them, and see where it goes. I'll sort her out with a primary manor, upon which her steward can be overseeing the construction of a fortified manor house, or similarly expensive building (such as a tower, planter's castle, etc.) Though you may well have two manors, I'd rather leave the second one undetailed for now, and if for any reason we need to introduce it, we can do so with the benefit of having had the setting fleshed out.
Servants
- Man-at-arms - The 'Standard Soldier', page 22, Ars Magica 5th Ed. Core Rules.
- Lady-in-waiting
- Lady-in-waiting
The man-at-arms is just a random guard who has managed to appear to his superiors to be sufficiently reliable, and capable on the road, that he has been picked to accompany her ladyship. Lily was trained by an entirely different person, who has a somewhat unusual view of the role of women in society. Lily trained with him while an older, and trusted, female servant looked on, thus gaining the benefits of one-on-one training and a distinct lack of unpleasant gossip about her fitness for marriage (she lacks the reputation 'tom-boy', or similar...)
The decision to train Lily in martial abilities is a good source of background and story... without checking your background (I'm leaving momentarily) I'd assume it was made by her father, and that it was his authority which saw it was done, and done discreetly. Perhaps some nearby manors had been attacked by the Welsh (or he had some vague forewarning of the attack that killed him), and the horrible aftermath made her father (who was often seperated from his daughter due to having more than one fief) fear terribly for her safety.
These two young ladies in waiting have stereotypical skill-sets. I'll draw up the character sheet in concert with the two players I have in mind... :D They have been carefully tutored prior to recently entering Lily's service.
nb. Lily has other servants that she may send for, and these will be determined when she has need of them. All her grogs will be played by other players, and their personalities will thus be set by the writing style, etc. of the player. Feel free to make some suggestions though.
RE: the man-at-arms, is this the standard bodyguard or is this the same fellow who she's learned her military skills from? I was hoping the one who trains her in swordplay and archery would be quite a bit more buff than the guy who follows her around, and that fellow should be a Frenchman who hangs out at the manor, holding down the fort. (i.e. available for training, but not for adventuring.)
Education
<i>House Jerbiton has set up a small number of academic schools where ladies may study mundane subjects, and this could work well for Lilly.
--I could see the girlhood friend of a Quaesitor being able to get into one of those schools, although I'd have to re-think how Lily and Mnem met, then.
House Jerbiton is a good reason for Lily to have a non-church inspired view of gender roles. A church education will just drive the stake deeper. While the concept
Manors
- can be the noble for one, possibly two local manors, neither of which can be Stretton. At this time, Church Stretton is a Royal Manor.
> Just pick them then, please?
You can have a single manor in the same part of Shropshire as Church Stretton, or two which are further afield. I'll need to go and rifle through my research...
If Stokesay is accessible enough, I'd like that.
I'll check it out later.
Noble Rank
--She's not supposed to be the Lady of all Shropshire. Perhaps this is where we're having a misunderstanding. I listed her name as "Lily of Shropshire" because the common surnames folks chose back then was based on what they did or where they were from, but mostly because I hadn't really been able to sit down and pick a good Norman name.
In your last email to me, which I have just gone and checked, you clearly stated that you would like Lily to hold the title of "Lady of Shropshire", which you informed me, was an Earldom.
I don't have a message subsequent to that saying that you chose a smaller title for Lily, and the preceding title was for the Earldom of Chester.
At any rate, I am glad that she is on a par with the local nobles.
When I wrote that email, I thought Shropshire was much smaller; I've since learned otherwise. That will teach me to make assumptions about land size by approximating what I think is the difference in population densities between the Bay Area and rural England; turns out the Bay is far, far more overpopulated in comparison than I'd thought, and that Shropshire is more than twenty-five times larger than the land area of San Francisco County. I thought I'd adjusted her background to accurately reflect that she's only maybe three fiefs, I'll make sure that's more clear.
Phew, I'm glad that was a misunderstanding. Just you wait, if you think that was big... wait til the players start pointing out how well I know the setting... :D "James, isn't there a city there..." :D Yes, it always amazes me how very very few people there were in England back then. Comparing Japanese and English history is crazy. A typical battle in the UK was 8-10,000 people (I read somewhere... :P), whereas a clash between two local Daimyo (equal to, say, the Lord of Chester and the Lord of Shrewesbury), would be something in the region of 30,000 people... (from another vaguely recollected source :D).
Weaponry
This is an academic discussion on gender and weaponry which I shall attend to tonight...
Although Lily, if she learnt to use a bow and a sword, would learn the Shortbow and 'Shortsword' (the Longbow is not used for sports or hunting, and requires years of dedicated training which caused the skeleton of the archer to become warped to the point where Archeologists can identify a longbowman by just his bones), and the Longsword is a weapon designed for mounted combat (you can't hit them if your sword doesn't reach), I am happy for you to have the larger versions of these weapons.</i>
--I picked longsword for two reasons. First, I thought that a master-at-arms of a noble house would most likely be a longsword specialist. Secondly, the longsword is a "better" weapon, so it seemed the most likely choice for someone who can afford it.
Weapon choice is situational. Knights would also take short swords into battle, regardless of whether they were Japanese samurai, or Teutonic nobles. The longsword has higher numerical damage, but it also has drawbacks.
Your point about the master-at-arms is good, though.
I would prefer to have her use a weapon more like a rapier-- a lighter, faster weapon, less likely to hack through armor, but more likely to be poked into chinks in armor (through the visor of a helm, a weak spot in one's gorget, etc). Unfortunately we're about three hundred years too early for that.
It is just something to bear in mind when writing your background. It is likely that your bow has a much lighter draw than a man's longbow, but I will keep the statistics the same, as it is still a superior weapon to the shortbow. I only know one person who might be able to fire a longbow, and it would take them time.
--I have to admit, this *really* bothers me. I'm sure you didn't mean anything by this comment, but to me it comes across as an implication that a female character of +2 strength is inherently weaker than a man of +2 strength.
Yes, just as a child with +2 strength, is weaker than an adult with +2 strength, or a Lily with +2 strength is weaker than a typical male longbowman with +2 strength.
Actually, a child with +2 strength has a penalty to his strength; at age 10 he takes a -2 penalty, so the child of +2 strength is equally as strong as an adult with a 0 strength. There are no such penalties for female characters.
Saying that she's not strong enough to draw a man's longbow because she's female, despite that she has the requisite strength (+2), indicates a belief that women are always inherently less strong than men.
"Women are genetically predisposed to usually both have a naturally lower amount of muscle mass than men, AND have a lower potential for gaining it, in the same way that a guy who is 4'5" will never equal his 300 lb, 6' linebacker buddy in strength. However, this is generally blown through by patterns of lifestyle - a woman who lives an active lifestyle will generally be much stronger than a man who lives a sedate lifestyle."
--I'm a genetics major; I'm quite familiar with differences between an X and Y chromosome. I maintain that the numerical values of characteristics represent an absolute value which are not dependent on said character's gender. The strength characteristic represents a static amount of physical power that character has. A female with the amount of physical strength represented by a score of +2, will be much less common than males of equal strength; however, the rarity of that occuring for the gender would not diminish that amount of physical power represented therein.
Did you read the article about longbows linked to this wiki?
--I've read wikipedia's article. Nothing in that article factors into my beef with your statement. I agree that the longbow is fantastically difficult to be able to use. To represent that, ArM5 says that a character must have at least +2 strength to be physically capable of using one. My character has a +2 strength, which I will agree is uncommon for a female. I still maintain that a female with +2 strength is every bit as capable of drawing the same longbow as a male character with +2 strength.
"The crossbow, while dating from classical times, became quite popular during the Middle Ages. While it took many years to train a longbowman, someone could become proficient with a crossbow with little training."
"Longbows were difficult to master because the force required to draw the bow was very high by modern standards. Though the draw weight of a typical English longbow is disputed, it was at least 36 kgf (360 N, 80 lbf) and possibly more than 65 kgf (650 N, 143 lbf). Considerable practice was required to produce the swift and effective combat fire required. Skeletons of longbow archers are recognizably deformed, with enlarged left arms, and often bone spurs on left wrists, left shoulders and right fingers."
The concept of a 140lb bow is somewhat terrifying to me. I used to use a 33lb recurve, for safety reasons, and thus when I read that a longbow could push an arrow so far through the trunk of a mature oak tree that the shaft protrudes from the far side...
This is an RPG. You're comfortable with the concept of a mage, either male or female, being able to kill someone with the power of their mind. I don't see why the idea of a woman being able to draw a longbow is so much more a stretch of the imagination. Especially when Jonathan Tweet and Mark Rein-Hagen have stated that this woman can draw a longbow. A character with strength +2 can draw a longbow. Lily has a +2 strength. You say this isn't enough unless it's a "special" longbow, because she's female.
If you'll examine the weapon tables on pages 176 and 177, the Strength requirement states: "The minimum strength score needed to use the weapon." Please note the distinct lack of any separate prerequisites to compensate for inherently weaker female characters.
These are attributes representing static ability levels for an adventure game. If your strength attribute doesn't measure how strong you are on the same scale as a man, what good is it? At some point, Lily will have to do something like roll a boulder aside; this boulder has a static mass which does not fluctuate based on the gender of the person touching it. Rolling said boulder is a task which has an Ease Factor. Is that Ease Factor then increased because she's female? It would take a male an Ease Factor of 8 to roll it out of the way, but a female would require an ease factor of 10 because she's genetically predisposed to have lower muscle mass? Or do girls get special styrofoam boulders to account for their "genetic predisposition"? Attributes are NOT dynamic values which vary based on the gender of the character.
>However, when we're defining the abilities of a character by numerical values, that value represents absolute ability, and is neither augmented nor diminished by the character's gender.
Not so. The book clearly states that age affects the value of a numerical ability, and it specifically states this regardless of the age related modifiers to abilities. I feel it was not unfair to apply this generally, but as with any rules interpretation, I'm happy to discuss it.
The book DOES clearly state that age affects the *numerical value of the characteristic*-- not the ability which is represented by those numbers. "A child is not going to be stronger than most adults, even if she has Strength +3" is imediately followed in the next paragraph explaining how those characteristics take numerical penalties based on age. A six year old with a +3 strength has the same physical power of an adult with -1 strength; the numerical value which represents the ability is numerically decreased because of age. Likewise, decrepitude points lowers those *numerical values* which represent static ability levels.
insinuate that *all* women are *always* weaker than *all* men.
That's a wild statement, which I find somewhat upsetting. I've read Lily's background, and made my judgement on the basis that she is heavily focused on study - such a bookworm that you felt it worth reducing her perception, and as such, leads a fairly sedate, noble lifestyle. I don't think you really appreciate how unfeasibly difficult it is to use a longbow.
I hope you can see how I found your previous statements to be equally upsetting due to its sexist implication. I do really appreciate how difficult it is to use a longbow. I can dance around a male opponent more than twice my own weight and wear him down until he's worn out enough to compensate for my short limbs' lack of range, and eventually drop the guy; I can't draw my cousin's hunting bow. According to the authors of ArM5, Lily can. According to you, she can't since she's female.
Rule that Lily can't use a longbow because she's not dedicated enough of her life to physical conditioning; that's fine. Cap her strength at a lower ability score because she spends too much time indoors; that's also fine. But *don't* say that her +2 strength represents a lower ability than a man's with +2 strength, because that's *not* a feature of the game system you've chosen to set your campaign in.
Lily *is* heavily focused on study. If you would like me to drop her strength score to reflect that, and use weapons modified to cater to that, I'm quite willing to to do so. Arbitrarily deciding that female characters are less capable than male characters of equal ability as an inherent feature of their gender, is not only sexist, but also entirely unsupported by the game system we're playing.
Cap the strength score female characters can take, if you wish. That's at least rational, if still chauvinist. But please do not impose arbitrary penalties which are unsupported by the game mechanics, as I find that both sexist and personally insulting.
Lily doesn't get out and plow fields or swing a blacksmith's hammer, so I can see her being limited to a max of +1 strength. I just really wanted to use a longbow because none of my ArM characters have ever had any bow skill, and I wanted to play with a longbow.</b>
<i>I'm approving it because at the end of the day, a) I don't really care about the difference in statistics, and the negative aspects of choosing a longbow will probably make up for them anyway, and b) Lily is a martial character who will be engaging in a fair amount of combat (as per Mnemosyne's brief).
I don't really care about game statistics. I do care, however, if you're going to arbitrarily impose a gender inequality into a game whose mechanics do not feature one.
<b>--Based on your description here, the longbow is certainly what she would use. Lily should be able to take down a deer, or stand on a crennellated wall and shoot someone trying to storm a castle. She shouldn't be able to run around like Peter Jackson's interpretation of Legolas (*hiss, groan*).
Lily should be able to take down a deer = Shortbow, you'd never use a longbow. stand on a crennellated wall and fire = Longbow.
Notes about the Character
Stuck here temporarily.
- I'm investigating the gender issues, but they could be quite severe for someone of her class, compared with, say, the grogs...
> Yes. She should have very little respect from her peers; other nobles should be polite, kind insofar as they're trying to convince her to marry them or their sons, but otherwise disdainful. She should be viewed by other nobles as being a bit of a willful child, and honestly, she pretty much is. She's more concerned with her own fun, and she doesn't realize yet that in order to really protect the people she cares about so much, she *needs* to go out and find a good husband who she might be able to convince to act in their interest. Possible adventures I was anticipating would be scenarios in which she would become painfully aware of just how horribly the commonfolk are being treated by the royal armies marching through on their way to and from Wales; she tries to fix the situation but is utterly stymied, rinse-lather-repeat until she wises up and resigns herself to having to marry some soft-hearted chump. Then going off to seek out said soft-hearted chump. Hilarity ensues.
The reaction would be that, while it's unseemly for the times, Our Father Who Art In Heaven clearly has some plan for her, and they would really prefer that whenever the time comes 'round for whatever that is, she's as inclined towards the church as possible. So long as she remains discreet about being educated, they're willing to accomodate her odd requests. When you control what someone knows, you have enormous power over them
(yet another reason for Lily to become quite fond of the magi, and for that to cause conflict with the church); the clergy's feelings for her should be about 50/50 between genuine respect and their desire to have influence over her. This could be slanted more towards the genuine respect if you're less cynical about the church than I am. (I grew up in Catholic school as a "precocious" child, and having had no small amount of "friendly debates" with priests over the natures of worship, sin, and forgiveness.) Her education would be, of course, facilitated in no small part by the Wealth virtue, as she'd be giving generously to the Church to "prove" her gratefulness.
