The Aging rules do create an effect like this though. A child has penalties to her Characteristics that gradually go away as she ages into adulthood. Then a character is at her peak until mid 30s, after which Aging penalties start to kick in as she ages.
The difference is that this isn't under the control of the character; although certainly the player can control to which Characteristics Aging penalties are applied (depending on the exact result of the Aging Roll).
In ArM5's character model "training" and "experience" improve Abilities rather than the underlying Characteristics, which are just affected by age (and supernatural effects).
I did. In the Rule about disabilities that I quoted, and that you quoted and agreed with in turn. Physical disabilities affect the form, and size is part of (the EN of) that form.
First, I don't see how that's relevant, one way or another.
But even if - how so? How are characteristics parallel to size or other aspects covered by Virtues/Flaws? How do they become immutable Essential Nature? (Unless they are Great or Poor.)
Lastly - once again, JL, you're conveniently ignoring the crux that I specifically ask anyone making your argument to address -
If you can permanently increase Size 0 to Size +1, why can't you increase Size -1 to Size 0?! And to be clear, by the rules on page 80 re Flaws, you can't.
You can't increase size to 0 from -1, because there is a specific flaw, as you point out that prevents you from doing so. There is no flaw that specifies a character is size 0, just as there is no flaw that specifies one's characteristics are in a range from -3 to +3.
So, if there isn't a flaw, and if, as you say, the rules are not exhaustive, I don't see a problem with imparting the virtue of Large, since we already impart the virtue of Great Characteristic, and we've made the cost the same as the second level of this virtue.
I already specifically addressed this, above, when I first talked about it. Since you didn't bother to read it there, I'll repost...
Sorry, imo your position is pure rules-lawyering, and completely throws any consistency or game-world "logic" out the window. In short, it is utterly unconvincing afaic.
If it works for you, great, but I would never buy it.
There is no rule allowing or preventing an increase in size, is there? I fail to see how it is rules lawyering, and believe me, I'm well aware of how to be a rules lawyer. There is a difference between the possible and whether or not you can realize the possibility, and as I said above, which you are ignoring, there is a lot of logistics and/or story involved to getting to this point. If a player is part of the Cult of Heroes, and they want to be bigger? Sure. They'll have done enough stuff to earn that ritual at some point. The same goes for the magus who spends time to get his LT up to 65 or more so he can invent the spell in some "reasonable" amount of time. What good reason do I have for saying to a player that no, you can't do that, because I don't think the rules allow you to be able to do it.
On one hand you say that the rules aren't exhaustive, and on the other hand you're excluding this possibility because it isn't listed explicitly in the rules? Tell me you don't see the irony there. I'm sure you won't, though.
I do believe you - you proved it to me in your previous post.
No irony, because the second is not what I'm saying. (In fact, it is so far from it, and you have repeatedly demonstrated that you are not fully reading my posts, that I have little interest in attempting to continue this point after this post. If you don't get it, I'm past caring - I'm sure others have long before now.)
The list of what is/is not EN is not exhaustive. However, I believe that the rules do demonstrate that Size is part of EN.
But that aside(!), I exclude the possibility not b/c it's not listed explicitly, but because an exactly parallel (almost identical) example IS specifically excluded.
You, otoh, believe that because Small is specifically a Flaw, that somehow makes some sizes immune to change while others are completely open to it. You are the one claiming that specificity is needed - that b/c +0 size is not specifically excluded, it must be perfectly legit, and becomes entirely different - with regard to the limits of Hermetic magic - from Size -1.
And that, by any other name, is rules lawyering, and of the dullest form.
You appear to do as little reading of my posts as I do of yours. I'm interested in good stories. If a player says to me, I want my character to become large somehow (and he's size 0) and he has a good reason for wanting to get there, and an interesting path, I'm going to let it happen. Not letting it happen, IMO, is the dullest form of rules lawyering.
If your point is (and has been all along?) that the Story is more important than the Rules, then 1) you never made that clear, and 2) all you had to do was say so. In fact, not even the latter - of all the various positions on these boards, that is one that is (almost?) universally taken for granted, and certainly one I've advocated many times.
So if(?) that has been the case, why bother with any reasons or rationalizations at all?
Well, I try and stay as close to the RAW as possible and then weigh what's reasonable if they don't cover a possibility (like this). What Marko proposed here is entirely reasonable, and as I said earlier, the path to these spells is not an easy road, IMS. If a magus wants to spend most of his career on getting the requisite Art scores, lab setup, and vis to do this spell, and it's his time, why do I care? If the player is a companion, and he's trying to do this, he's got to do a lot of work. Both involve a lot of story, which I thought was completely obvious.
We're going through circular arguments here because of the initial focus-
Preturnatural growth and shring is Mu, and temporary, because permenant benefits can only be gained through creo rituals.
So the OP was asking if there was a way to do a permenant Creo ritual to let them increase size.
Honestly if you put a Mu requisite on it I don't see why not, the question becomes establishing the level and effects.
I think for the purposes of my saga I will set a new guideline that allows you to increase size from 0 to 1. I agree that increase from -1 to 0 should not be allowed as you are getting rid of a virtue and that opens up a whole can of worms that i'd rather not get into.
I think setting a guideline at 50 seems appropriate. This is the point at which you can increase a physical stat to +4 which is when it goes above the normal human range of -3 to +3, but within the exceptional human range, of +4/+5. Since the large virtue makes you large outside the normal range but within the exceptional human range, then it seems appropriate.
I'd say without Original Research or simply allowing it in your saga, the path that already exists for gaining virtues after character creation is creating a Mystery. That's how I'd go about it, and I'd also allow Mysteries that granted/cursed one with Slight Frame, Dwarf, or Obese which are all flaws. Of ocurse one can get Obese or eve Slight Frame without Magic, but to actually get the flaw with some Supernatural method, I'd say a Mystery works pretty well and doesn't delve into any rules tripping.
Is being a large human being actually a more perfect example of humanity?
Increasing your characteristics clearly brings you closer to the platonic ideal of a human, correcting the flaws of your nature.
But I suspect the platonic ideal of a mortal human is Size +0.
