And those requirements are explicitly stated in the description of the Virtue as written. Again, Suppressed Gift suggests it might come back somehow, while the Virtue Failed Apprentice says that the Gift has not been completely destroyed there may be some Supernatural Abilities. I would encourage a prospective player of such a character to explore the fullness of Supernatural virtues and flaws, but I would counsel certain directions, not require them...
Respectfully, that's a weak argument, IMO, as Suppressed Gift did not exist at the time the Virtue in question was published. If it had, the text might be quite different.
Given my stance that all rules are suggestions anyway: Po-tay-to, Po-tah-to. 
Still, I agree to disagree (insofar as we disagree, which isn't by much IMO) on this point... though I do think, for ezzelino who is looking for some solid guideline to hang his hat on visa vi "the problem" of Failed Apprentices, mine is a reasonable suggestion of a "solution."
Sure, if was necessary for the RAW to be adjusted, that could be an errata or it could also have been mentioned in Apprentices, that Suppressed Gift must be taken by Failed Apprentice.
And some would say that this is not a solution, such as me. I prefer guidelines and rubrics rather than hard and fast rules on if X then Y. If X and then A-P are appropriate, Q is questionable and R-Z are right out...
I'm also of the opinion that making Suppressed Gift automatic for a Failed Apprentice would cut down on design options. If the player wants the combination, let him select it.
After all, Failed Apprentice specifically says that there are many different reasons why you couldn't complete your apprenticeship.
If yours was an incomplete Gift, you may or may not suffer the negative effects of the Gift (it might have appeared as a Gentle Gift, but was really a weak one). If you lost your Gift, then again you may or may not suffer its negative effects. Is it completely gone, leaving you unable to perform any magical feat? Or does it remain, as a Supernatural Ability of some kind?
Let's keep all options open to the player. If he thinks having both make sense for that specific character, let him take both. You can always suggest it, I don't think making it automatic would be a good move. YMMV and all.
At the risk of derailing the thread, I'm curious: do you think requiring Landed Nobles take Oath of Fealty limits design options? If not, why do you feel it is different?
A few reasons why I think it is different:
- It is an historical fact that to be a landed noble in the middle ages, you had to take an Oath of Fealty. You could not be a landed noble without taking such an oath.
- Oath of Fealty is a Social flaw; it has no mechanical effect on the game.
Neither of these are true the case for a Failed Apprentice. The Gift has clear (negative) mechanical effects. And more importantly, you don't have to have the Gift anymore to be a failed apprentice. That is clearly stated in the virtue's description.
Your second point is incorrect. It is a Story flaw and by taking it you cannot take another Story flaw. In that in limits the character opinions available to Landed Nobles.
That is a technicality, a mis-labeled description between Social Status and Story. It is a story flaw, it counts as a story flaw, and story flaws do not have a mechanical effect on the game.
The Gift/Magical Air has the same mechanical effect on the game as Social Handicap, which is a minor flaw.
Ultimately, I find your arguments fatally flawed and this conversation has become pointless. Since I can't add you to my ignore list, I shall simply withdraw.
That's quite simple. Add me to your Foes list in the User Control Panel. From there, it describes Foes messages as being "not fully visible."
Fatally flawed, indeed.
That is an excellent way of looking at it too.
There are certainly multiple ways of explaining the situation. And story potential (if you want) in the player characters investigating the detail.
I would nitpick this. "They had the Gift" is a much truer statement. Saying "they have the Gift" contradicts the Virtue's description in multiple places; it explicitly says otherwise. Yes, they may still have it in a not-properly-functioning way. But this does not mean they did not have it in the past, so the former statement is still valid. However, they may no longer have the Gift at all, which works with the former statement and not the latter.
Regardless, the Virtue does not make still having a portion of the Gift a requisite for being a "laboratory assistant."
Chris
and on a different matter entirely
We're ignoring allodial property today?
No allodials in england true, but in continental europe, sure.
Now, many allodials did give oath to a more powerful lord nearby, for safety, but this was by no means a requirement.
Sorry, I mistyped. But my point stands -- a Story flaw does not have mechanical impact on the game.
I must admit I had to look up "allodial" rights to make sure, but in this instance I think you are mixing up nobility vs landholder. A landed noble has both, but they can also be selected independently.
- You can be a landholder without being part of the nobility. (Possibly results in the "Wealthy" virtue if those holdings are extensive)
- You can be part of the nobility without being a landholder. (The "Gentleman/Gentlewoman" virtue)
- You can be a member of the nobility and only hold non-feudal landholding. (The "Gentleman/Gentlewoman" virtue, possibly with the "Wealthy" virtue as well)
- You can be a member of the nobility and hold feudal landholding. (The "Landed Noble" virtue)
Essentially, landed noble packages Gentleman/Gentlewoman, some elements of Wealthy, and Temporal Influence.
In the same way, being a Failed Apprentice does not mean one still have The Gift, or suffers from its negative social effects. They can be combined, or not, based on what kind of character the player is interested in.
And that is my whole point -- if the player wants to have both, let him choose to do so. Don't force that on him by default.
A Failed Apprentice with the Suppressed Gift is completely different from one whose Gift was badly damaged, or from another one with no Gift remaining at all.
I did read Suppressed Gift flaw from Apprentices, when I got home late in the evening last night. I can see that this might be useful for a few "Failed" apprentices, but only a very few. But within the text of the flaw, it suggests certain characters or situations where this would be appropriate. Further, as the flaw is described it suggests that it can be resolved (favorably) to restore the Gift. So pushing this flaw on any and all who take the Failed Apprentice virtue is very nearly defining, that at some point in the future this character could have a restored gift and finish apprenticeship and become a full magus. There is nothing inherently wrong with such a character, but it may not be anything close to what a player wants when they are making a character with the Failed Apprentice virtue.
In the event that this is made a requirement for Failed Apprentices in a saga, I suggest treating it only as a Hermetic Flaw, and not a story flaw. Discount the ability to restore the Gift through stories, and allow the character to take another, preferred story flaw. Having it fill the Story flaw slot for a character whose player is not interested in pursuing those stories is...unnecessary. But much the same can be accomplished with requiring the character to take Magical Air, and allowing him to choose any story flaw.
I'm awfully off topic here, but "freiherr" is as noble title as far as I understand - and explicitly an allodial noble.
I'll go have a look in LoM later.
Doesn't work. You're an administrator or moderator and as such can't be added to a Foes list. Sorry... never post while on antihistamines. I just end up embarrassing myself. 
Fair point, I was overlooking the Story Flaw aspect of it... though I return to the Oath of Fealty example. However, Suppressed Gift does give you something Magical Air doesn't: Arts scores and the associated Magic Resistance. It makes sense that a failed apprentice would have some score in the Arts.
I stand corrected. Or sit, or whatever. I had no idea... a flaw in the forum, IMO. I'm not really a mod of the entire forum, just for the PbP sagas I'm running.
I don't think that's the case, regarding resistance. I specifically remember that if the individual with Suppressed Gift knew Parma Magica that they would be unable to perform it, and I think I remember it mentioned form resistance wasn't functional, too.
Just tested it. I cannot add Jonathan to foes list. Not that I want to, but just to check 
However, I had no problems sending LuciusT to the bottom of Tartarus. In the case of Jonathan it seems he is ranked as moderator, probably of one of the subforums (admin of one of the online sagas?) and so cannot be ignored.
Xavi
Apprentices, page 13: While the Gift is suppressed, the character cannot perform Hermetic magic, improve his Arts or perform the Parma Magica. His Arts do provide him with Magic Resistance and he continues to suffer the negative social penalties of the Gift." (emphasis added, obviously)
Edit:
In the case of LuciusT, he's just an idiot who really needs to remember when not to hit the submit button.