I don't think that it was.
My thinking is that the student isn't generating the study total, the teacher is. The -3 to the student's social interactions from the gift has no total to apply to.
It does not matter who generates the study total , the -03 penalty applies to all advancement totals.
It is not only a social penalty , but a study penalty as well.
(if taught by a mundane teacher)
Where is it you´re picking that up from? I havent seen it before?
I can't find a RAW reference immediately , but mundane teaching to a Gifted student is a social interaction.
The penalty of the Gift is not totally passive and only applied to social rolls made by the Gifted person , afaik.
There might be something in Hedge Magic about Gifted teachers (without parma) and Gifted students getting a -06 study penalty.
(-03 from each Gift)
Yes, the penalty from the Gift applies, see page 106, Arm5, 5th paragraph under "Training Your Apprentice".
However, since the master already has to extend his Parma to his student, he might as well extend it to the teacher too.
That statement supports the no penalty point of view, it only gives a-3 penalty (presumably for the master's gift) rather than a -6.
Page 75 where the -3 penalty is discussed only speaks about a penalty to rolls when trying to overcome their "reputation" by negotiation,
In the interpretation where the student's gift affects their ability to learn from a teacher you have the situation where in a class of several students a gifted student will necessarily learn less than their non-gifted classmates. This doesn't ring true to me. Gifted people are not trusted and make others uneasy. They're not necessarily slower.
Is teaching a social interaction or isnt it?
Is the Gift totally passive , affecting only the Gifted person with a -03 penalty on their social rolls?
It has nothing to do with being slower , as intellectual prowess is unimpaired.
Fear and mistrust are a significant distraction.
I see nothing wrong with the interpretation that a Gifted student in a class of mundanes , affects them as well ,
so that teacher and fellow students are at -03.
It makes Parma that much more important.
That statement makes it clear the -3 is because the apprentice has no Parma. There nothing that says he doesn't have another -3 because of the parens lack of Parma, nor the Poor Student Virtue, or any other effect that may or may not be present. Is there anything in Rival Magic on that?
Well, the Gifted student cannot ask questions, as the teacher would feel threatened by them. You know how smart kids ask questions they already know the answer just to teach the rest of the class, or see how dumb the teacher is?
Teaching to an all Gifted students class would reduce the Quality. How many Gifted could hide in a normal class without reducing global Quality, and how would their Quality be reduced by hiding quietly in the corner?
Totally passive is a mis-characterization of the take that the gift's penalties don't apply to a gifted character learning from an ungifted teacher.
I don't think that you'll find a blanket statement that all social situations that a gifted person is associated with are hampered by a -3 modifier that cuts across all game mechanics systems. You'll find the quote that I found which says something along the lines of "attempts to counteract the effects of the gift by negotiation suffer a -3 penalty" which is a pretty limited statement.
When I was younger I taught studio lessons for brass musicians, when I was in graduate school I taught laboratory sessions, and I'll give you my suspicion that my ability to teach a particular student didn't depend greatly upon my opinion of them.
I don't buy that, The gift tweaks folks so that they act in a manner similar to the way they'd act towards a person with an unsavory reputation. An unsavory reputation would not lead a teacher to make the mental leap"they're asking questions to make me look bad".
Actually I think the Gift just might have that sort of effect the teacher would be generally suspicious of the gifted pupils motives at least at first. Still I tend to go with the interpretation that the study total is generated by the teacher not the student so I don't think it would penalize teaching. Think of it this way a good teacher can teach a student he doesn't trust but no matter how good a teacher you are your teaching will suffer if the students don't trust you.
And the reaction to the Gift , is not an "opinion" of them.
Read (or re-read) the First Impressions section on page 76.
Top , right-most column , page75:
The specific word training was used , not teaching , so it may not be specifically included or excluded.
Training: , page 164
And suspiciously similar to the circumstances for a +06 bonus in teaching.
We generally shield those around us when we have to interact with them in such a way, figuring we're probably not in danger inside of the Aegis of the Hearth. You don't even need to shield the apprentice in this case, just the teacher, though you certainly could do both.
Chris
Disputatio , page 103 , Art & Academe:
Insert , page 104:
Disputatio covers Artes Liberales , Philosophiae , Theology , and Civil and Canon law.
Artes Liberales being the important one for covenant-based teaching purposes.
There is no reason to suppose trained academics do not use this method outside a university environment.
Whether this translates to a -03 penalty for a whole seasons study total is not clear.
Based on that, it is hard to argue the Gift does not reduce the +6 for one-to-one teaching. Group teaching is still open for interpretation.
Rival Magic , page 08: