Belinda is Eponas daughter by the water-dragon in faerie: age:5 in 1242
Int 0 Per 0
Pre 3 Com 2
Str -1 Sta 0
Dex -1 Quick 0
faerie heritage(major -3)
lesser malediction:water dependancy(minor -1)
strong faerie blood-undine(major +3)
faerie legacy(minor +1)
faerie background(free +0)
affinity faerie cult lore(minor +1)
Area lore:Mallorca 2
Is she really going to be a companion-level character in the story, or should she be made as a grog?
given the circumstances of her birth, I don't see how she could be a grog.
The nature of someone's birth shouldn't determine whether they should be a companion or grog. It's their place in the story that should determine what they are.
A companion is a character that should have stories revolve around them, like magi. They're the lead, or at least the co-lead of the story. Is Belinda going to be one of those characters?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
One can define the other. Just as, for example, a redcap will be a companion, so will a child who is born of a faerie fertility dragon-serpent during a ritual where the mother never had contact with a man.
This is a character whose story- though yet to be told, is something designed by faerie father in order to fulfill a role.
Seriously, look the character over and I have to wonder why the question is even being asked, unless you are simply compulsively going along and asking it of everyone.
It would be like asking if a child born in a manger under a guiding star was really going to be a major character.
So why are you asking? Because honestly, the character is so transparently a companion from my perspective that I found the question offensive.
Offensive? Wow, really? That's a bit dramatic.
I asked for the same reason I asked Trogdor about Maria; because I feel like we have a lot of companion-level characters that are not doing companion-level things. Part of this is all of the specialists we have that have been built as companions but don't do anything but sit around in the covenant and teach. I don't think that's the intent of companions.
Companions are meant to be on the same level as magi from a story perspective. So they should lead adventures, have stories written especially for them, have their story flaws influence the game. So my question is, is that what you intend for Belinda. If it is, then awesome, keep her as a companion.
But in my opinion, the fact of her birth from a dragon doesn't inherently make her a companion. If her basic purpose in the story is going to be as a sidekick who occasionally gets kidnapped by her father (for example), she's clearly in grog territory in my mind. Supporting cast at best, and never the story lead (or co-lead).
It's not about the character's background, it's about what the character's place in the story is going to be. And if that place is as a lead character, then make her a companion. If not, she should be a grog.
Belinda was created by her father- who is a faerie dragon 'echo' of a magical creature who was apparently worshiped in ancient times.
I therefore assume that the father has created his children (there was an un-named servant who also had a child- they could have moved away or this could be a second companion level child) with the intent of starting up his religion again, and his children are obviously intended to be priest/priestess and mystagouges in those plans.
I would consider that to be story level events, implied with the flaw faerie heritage, which is why it seemed you were asking without looking at the character, which is what seemed offensive to me.
I wouldn't worry about if she's a grog or companion when it comes to mechanics. I mean, she should probably have Strong Faerie Blood, regardless of her role in the story. Don't cop out and go "She's just mildly Faerie." The character creation rules are guidelines when making a character to start play. If a character is manufactured in play they will diverge from those guidelines pretty quickly.
Anyway, leading the revival of a new religion is perfect companion material and a major not-a-grog flag.
The father was not the dragon. The dragon inspired an orgyand ensured fertility of the participants. There were male grogs involved. Like it or not, one of them is the actual father.
It is this child that will provide Insight into Fertility. The Dragon did insure certain Virtues and Flaws. I will give you leeway there.
Still, I say start the kid off as a Grog.
The rules in terms of how faerie blood is gained make it pretty explicit that she would have strong faerie blood, and as described here, quite a bit more.
She is clearly a central character and a companion role, as well as by technical necessity a companion.
Trying to change this character to a grog would destroy it at the conceptual level.
in addition I am getting very frustrated about the way this process is working. There appears to be no shortage of people willing jump on a concept to beat it down as "too powerful" or "not realistic" (because a game about faeries and magic requires strict realism), and when concepts are initially brought up I get crickets. I pointed out that no man had touched Epona back during the adventure and your comment then was that it didn't matter, the power of the serpent was such that she would still be pregnant. now when the child is five you are retroactively changing what happened. I have asked about Marius lab in his thread, nobody has said a word. I expect once he starts putting it to use though I will get reamed a new one by people complaining about the teaching bonus being too high with his teaching score and him actually using it as a philosophical lab and why does it have a -3 upkeep and on and on and on... the need for retroactive changes to keep everyone happy that other people's characters fit their concepts is simply more stress than I had expected to sign up for in a game.
In my defense, there is a lot on my plate and some players are constantly exploding with new ideas and not giving enough time to let things soak in. I also cannot keep track of everything, so I divy up tasks and wait for the troupe in general to make comments and aesthetic judgments.
Also, I often find it in the best interests of everyone to try to stay out of debates as much as possible. I try to limit myself to nudges towards compromise.
I also ask questions. Such as
Do you really need another Companion?
Wasn't the mother someone elses character?
Do you realize how horrible and manipulative chthonic dragons are?
What can I do to bring satisfaction to everyone?
I really don't think that it really matters if the kid is officially a Grog or Companion. Rereading the thread, I do agree with silveroak that strong blood is appropriate here regardless of if the dragon is "technically" the father or not. Some demons do similar things and those children are strongly tainted. Plus if the dragon was using something like fertility magic the kid wouldn't even have a balanced set of virtues and flaws.
Summary: Stop worrying on if the child should be a Grog or a Companion. If silveroak plays the character like a companion cool! If the character acts more like a supporting grog fine. Grogs don't have to stay balanced. If the character stays in the background acts like a NPC cool. Just all stay cool and don't stress.
Side note: Whatever happened with the dragon kitten?
Wait, chthonic? As in chthonic magic? As infernal not Faerie? That would change a lot of things.
Actually Fleur planned to give the dragon kitten to Vibria as a pet, but I think I was waiting for the Vavel dragon plot to end and her return to the covenant...
Magic yes, not a Faerie also yes. But not so much Infernal as Unclean. Chthonic has several meanings in this context. SuGar, consort of the goddess Mari, is "Chthonic". As is Mari.
Anyway, Silveroak, I am begging you to please let this one go. You have three other Companions in play already. There is no reasonable justification for a fourth. And Epona is not your character to begin with. That isPeregrine, and as he abadoned her she is NPC and my domain. Maybe I decided she had a miscarriage or a boy. yes, it is a boy child. Honestly, I am a little weary of all these grown men playing girls. At first it was artsy, now it is getting old.
Please Silveroak, please! You don't need this character, it serves no utility for the saga, and I just don't want to deal with it.
As for the origins, I did flat out state what happened in that very story. The father is another grog. As she is not your character, there is no perogative to protest it.
Please please please stop making companion characters. I went to bat for you with the Rich character. Give me this one and let this go. You have Donna, who I have only just now figured out how to incorporate. You have Marius, who isn't even played and just used as a tool. There is no need for this fourth companion. It is making me very unhappy.
And everyone else!
Stop making new characters!
Let us get what we have sorted out first.
I said I would not remake this character as a grog.
If it is not approved it simply does not exist.
Hoever when I made this character you had posted that you did not care how many mages and companions each person had. I would appreciate a little consistency in what the rules and guidelines are so I can stop wasting my time, because right now it appears to be mob rule where Marko caves to the prevailing winds.
PS a great many explicatives were omitted from this post
At one time, I didn't care. ButIdid not forsee the unintended consequences f y apathy. Perhapsif there were mmore regular-guy copanins and not so many exceptional-guy companions, it would have continued to slip under my radar.
And it is not just you. I think Nythyn ditched us because he grew weary of being corrected. Sorry to see him go, but we will be okay.
I tae responsibiity mysef. I took on a arge number of players and I am not very good at scrutenizing characters and tend to let things slide until there is a problem.
If you listen to fools, the Mob Rules
(Mob Rules is the title to my favorite non-Ozzy Black Sabbath album, tite track featured in the animated film "Heavy Metal")
You are not far off though. I a devoted to the concept of Troupe Style play. As such I am not a dictator DM. I am first ammongst equals only bcause I declared myself so, and I am beholden to a democratic process. More of a Repubic aybe, for there are boundaries and vested athourities and such.
It isn't a matter of caving in. If I really like something, I will defend it. If I don't llike it or don't care, I try to stay silent untill soeone else gets on it.
Dedicated to the troupe style of play is one thing, rewriting history every week because we can't agree on how things should have happened is another.
How about I ditch Rilcheaux (we can find a way to write him out either in the adventure he is in or afterwards) and keep Belinda as is? I like the idea of Rilcheaux but I don't think he fits this troop as well, with the plotting and social manipulation. Or we can retire him as an NPC source of information/deus ex machine (for revealing parts of the plot/background they can't generally discover on their own) for storytellers that we don't have to track, however you want to play it.
Again I beg you, let it go. There are too many issues with this character and I really don't want to deal with any of it.
Pretty please with sugar on top.
If you must, ship Epona off to one of your games and do whatever you want there. As far as this game is concerned: the father was a male grog, there were no faeries involved, and the child is a boy and a grog.
That's me, not the troupe.
What you see as inconsistancy is actualy me passing the buck. I have a hard time saying no, so I let others do it. My bad, I admit it. But my goal is consistent. That is to keep the game going. To that end I try to avoid the stress that caused me to collapse last time (that last experience is why I am so harsh about any form of PM gaming or debate).
Let this one go. I am just not digging the concept or design or anything. And Epona is not your character in the first place.
Keep Rich, Donna, and Marius. That is too many as it is already. You don't need this one, and I don't want it.
As for consistancy, I have placed a temporary ban on all new character for everyone.
Here's my problem
I'm tired of history changing on me.
I was very specific in the adventure that Epona had not lain with a man, and *you8 told me that it didn't matter, the dragon could have her conceive without a man being involved the same as it did for Felicia.
And dicking everyone over just because you are being a dick to me does not resolve the problem, it compounds it.
Considering how hard I argued with you over the idea that Epona should not be pregnant at the time and you insisted on an immaculate conception, and became confrontational about that, which was also all you, this is more than just some detail or the character issue at this point- the inconsistency seems now to settle on your whims, and I am just getting flat out pissed off. I don't give one flying fig about this character, I thought it would be a nice addition to the new generation of children that are being brought in with the new apprentices, what I do care about is the fact that while nobody else seems to have a problem with this character you seem upset over it on the basis of points that you specifically fought with me to include back when the character was, story wise, conceived.
That isn't even pretending to be consistant in any way shape or form.
silveroak Marko's not changing anything. It just means the dragon performed magic artificial insemination using one of the grogs for the "genetic material". Like a doctor could today IRL. Since the dragon is magical it doesn't fly to have a faerie child. Let Marko make his choices about the character. Its not dicking everyone over to limit character creation, especially since the general rule is one magi, one companion and a collection of grogs which are troupe property anyway.
Finally, Prince of Boredom had a problem with the character, and I think you should let Marko have his say about products of his stories. Notably that the dragon is magical and chthonic, which means the concept doesn't work.
And even if none of the above applied, this whole deal is causing too much upset. Both for you and Marko. So can we all just agree to Let it Go?