Of female characters in RPG's

[Brancaleone]

This particular play has often been misinterpreted as the master, possessing the skills of the art is able to face three fighters at the same time. The illustration and text actually reveal that the particular "posta " or guard which the master has assumed is able to defend and offend an attack from any one of the originating offensive stances.

Misinterpreted according to who? You don't write that it's a "mighty deed" afforded by the grace of God that he survives if it's merely one opponent he's facing.

From my own copy of Colin Hatcher's translation of Fior di Bataglia sitting in front of me:
"Here are three opponents who all want to kill this Master. The first aims to kill him with a thrust. The second intends a cut. The third will throw his sword at the Master like a spear. If the master can perform a mighty deed and avoid being killed, then God will have indeed blessed him with great skill." Response: "You are all cowards and know little of this art. You're all just words without any deeds." - Again implying this is not a 1v1.

And another:

31r-a - "Here we see three friends who seek to kill this Master, who's awaiting them with his two handed sword. The first intends to throw his sword at the master like a spear. The second aims to strike him with a cut or thrust. The third intends to throw two spears he has made ready, as you see drawn here." Response: "I wait calmly for them to come at me one after the other and my defense won't fail against cuts, thrusts, nor any handheld weapon they throw at me." - Again, multiple opponents.

That's some laughably shitty translation.

Really? Because the translation is by a guy that spent 17 years studying the language of the original manuscripts and putting it into an easily comprehensible form. There's a whole commentary section in the forward on the translation methodology.

"It's important to understand that the manuscript is written in verse (irregular loose rhyme or meter) perhaps for mnemonic purposes. To make it fit in verse (including a need to rhyme however loosely) Fiore has used many unusual expressions and many redundant words. In making my translation I have not attempted to create verse. I have given Fiore's unusual expressions their best equivalent translation and I have eliminated as much of the redundancy as I can (for example excessive over-use of the word "and")."

An alternate translation by Kendra Brown that says essentially the same thing:

"We are three players that wish to strike this Master. One would strike with the point, another the edge, and another wants to throw his sword against the aforesaid Master, so that it will be a great feat indeed if this Master is not killed. May God make him suffer."

Noi semo tri zugadori che volemo ferir questo magistro. Uno gli di trare de punta l'altro de taglo, l'altro vole lanzare la sua spada contra lo ditto magistro. Si che bene sera grande fatto ch'ello non sia morto questo magistro. Che dio lo faza ben tristo.

Farly literal translation: "We are three players* that want to wound this master. One [wants] to give him the point**, the other the edge, the other wants to throw his sword against the aforesaid master. Hence it will well be a great feat that this master would not be dead. May God make him well sorrowful***"

*zugadori (=giocatori), maybe in the sense of "three who want to try their luck" with the master (although Fiore uses zugo as "technique",
which would make it "three who know sword-techniques")
**trare (=tirare), in the same sense as 'tirare di scherma', i.e. "to fence"; more literally "one wants to use the point", etc.
***tristo can mean "sad/who is sorrowful", "unfortunate", "that causes sorrow/evil", and here it's used in the first/second sense.

Kendra Bow's translation is on point, apart from 'to strike' instead of 'to wound'.

The first one you quoted, well, is simply shit. Zugadore becomes "opponent", ferir becomes "kill", trare becomes also "kill", because at this point why not, since we are making it up, and then there's the masterpiece of the last sentence "if the Master can perform a mighty deed and avoid being killed, then God will have indeed blessed him with great skill", which is entirely made up (and with a curse becoming a compliment).


About the following passage, the translation you quoted goes: "You are all cowards and know little of this art. You're all just words without any deeds. I challenge you to come at me one after another, if you dare, and even if there are a hundred of you, I will destroy all of you from this powerful guard."

Again, farly literally: "You are worthless and know little of this art. Walk the walk*, since there is no room for talk, let come, one at a time, whoever knows how to do [it] and can [do it]. Since if you were a hundred, I would waste** all of you, by means of this guard which is so good and strong".

*literally "do the deeds, since there is no room for words"
**surprisingly enough, "I would fuck you all up" wouldn't be inappropriate, given the original meaning of guastare

If these passages are any indicative of the quality of his translation, the guy can claim all the years of 'study' he wants, obfuscate with 'methodology', or blame it on Fiore's alleged "many unusual expressions and many redundant words". If I were you, I would find a better translation before starting to analyze the actual content of Fiore's work.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

french isn't a real language, stop lying

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

If these passages are any indicative of the quality of his translation, the guy can claim all the years of 'study' he wants, obfuscate with 'methodology', or blame it on Fiore's alleged "many unusual expressions and many redundant words". If I were you, I would find a better translation before starting to analyze the actual content of Fiore's work.

Three men attack the master. One uses the point, the other the edge, the third throws the sword. It's a great feat if he's able to survive. God damn him.

The spirit of the text doesn't change in either translation. We can quibble over certain words meaning "wound or kill", but ultimately the intent is clear when at the end where it says it's proof of skill if he lives. They aren't just trying to wound him.

Again, farly literally: "You are worthless and know little of this art.

"Voi sete cativi e di questa arte save pocho."

Kendra Bow: "You are wicked and of this art you know little;"

You're Italian yes?, is there a particular reason you're translating "cativi" as "worthless" rather than wicked? Wicked and cowardly are closer in meaning in English than either with worthless. Both words attack the moral character of the assailants, not just their skill.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

Alias.... the real deal for real fun!

Get your Alias real doll constructed today!

 

[Brancaleone]

If these passages are any indicative of the quality of his translation, the guy can claim all the years of 'study' he wants, obfuscate with 'methodology', or blame it on Fiore's alleged "many unusual expressions and many redundant words". If I were you, I would find a better translation before starting to analyze the actual content of Fiore's work.

Three men attack the master. One uses the point, the other the edge, the third throws the sword. It's a great feat if he's able to survive. God damn him.

The spirit of the text doesn't change in either translation. We can quibble over certain words meaning "wound or kill", but ultimately the intent is clear when at the end where it says it's proof of skill if he lives. They aren't just trying to wound him.

Again, farly literally: "You are worthless and know little of this art.

"Voi sete cativi e di questa arte save pocho."

Kendra Bow: "You are wicked and of this art you know little;"

You're Italian yes?, is there a particular reason you're translating "cativi" as "worthless" rather than wicked? Wicked and cowardly are closer in meaning in English than either with worthless. Both words attack the moral character of the assailants, not just their skill.

Kendra Bow's translation of the passages is fine (apart from a few things). It's the other guy who, I'd say, has at most a passing knowledge of modern Italian, and just makes it up when he cannot make sense of the text. I think there's actually quite a bit of nuance in the dramatized introduction to the setting, and all of it gets lost with shoddy translation.

'Cattivo' in the modern sense comes from a specific expression, captivus diaboli ("prisoner of Satan"), and it means straight up "evil/bad/of bad quality". By itself, the older meaning is closer to 'wretched/worthless'. And the other occurrence of cativo in Fiore is lassa la sua daga cativa e vole la tua bona, so literally "he leaves his useless dagger and wants your good one".

The three guys seem to be looking for renown (i.e., that one of them would become the guy who wounded/defeated the master) and they are the ones talking, and trying to pump themselves up, while at the same time knowing deep inside that they are taking a big risk (which would explain the shift from 'it will be a miracle if he gets away alive' to 'may God make him miserable'). It's sounds more like "at least one of our speciality techniques will work", rather than "if we attack at the same time we'll kill him" (in which case they should just surround him at 120 degrees one from another, rather than keep talking about the different techniques they are going to try on him). [It actually reminds me of a certain group of level 1 adventurers in Throne of Bhaal].
First thing the master does is dashing their artificial confidence: they are 1) inferior fencing material and 2) have very little knowledge. Then he appears to goad them into either giving up ("come who knows or can", i.e., since you deep down you know not and can not, better leave now) or to prove they actually have some skill by attacking him one at a time (a uno a uno). Which is why he then says that even if they were one hundred, he would still not take a single wound: i.e., his guard would block any kind of technique (point, edge, throwing). It is true that he subsequently uses the plural (e cum quelo passar io me covro rebatendo le spade, ve trovo discoverti, e de ferire ve faro certi), but it is also a forced choice, sintactically speaking, in order not to make the period a nightmare, and it does not necessarily mean that he's referring to the three attacking him at the same time (which would make the 'one hundred' reference a ridiculous boasting, in case they were meant to attack all at once, and would also defeat the 'prove me wrong about you not having any skill by attacking me one at a time'). I have the impression that the episode is more about "no matter what technique is used, either lunging, slashing or throwing, I won't be wounded" rather than "no matter the number of attackers I will fuck them all up".

 

[pickmeister]

Imagine training for months, years even. You’re most physically capable you’ve ever been. You’ve studied tactics to outsmart your opponent with ease. Your mind is hardened to perform your best under pressure without slightest hesitation.
You’re on a mission.
You’ve waited for this.
You know what to do.
And the only thought in your mind is your teammate having her PMS today.

 

[Dadd]

Yeah wouldn't it be so demoralizing if your superiors ordered you to help clean her up?

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

'Cattivo' in the modern sense comes from a specific expression, captivus diaboli ("prisoner of Satan"), and it means straight up "evil/bad/of bad quality". By itself, the older meaning is closer to 'wretched/worthless'. And the other occurrence of cativo in Fiore is lassa la sua daga cativa e vole la tua bona, so literally "he leaves his useless dagger and wants your good one".

The three guys seem to be looking for renown (i.e., that one of them would become the guy who wounded/defeated the master) and they are the ones talking, and trying to pump themselves up, while at the same time knowing deep inside that they are taking a big risk (which would explain the shift from 'it will be a miracle if he gets away alive' to 'may God make him miserable'). First thing the master does, is dashing their artificial confidence: they are 1) inferior fencing material and 2) have very little knowledge. Then he appears to be goading them into either giving up ("come who knows or can", i.e., since you deep down you ) or to prove they actually have some skill by attacking him one at a time (a uno a uno). Which is why he then says that even if they were one hundred, he would still not take a single wound: i.e., his guard would block any kind of technique (point, edge, throwing). It is true that he subsequently uses the plural (e cum quelo passar io me covro rebatendo le spade, ve trovo discoverti, e de ferire ve faro certi), but it is also a forced choice, sintactically speaking, in order not to make the period a nightmare, and it does not necessarily mean that he's referring to the three attacking him at the same time (which would make the 'one hundred' reference a ridiculous boasting, in case they were meant to attack all at once, and would also defeat the 'prove me wrong about you not having any skill by attacking me one at a time'). I have the impression that the episode is more about "no matter what technique is used, either lunging, slashing or throwing, I won't be wounded" rather than "no matter the number of attackers I will fuck them all up".

Firstly, I appreciate the nuanced response.

Some contentions: Fiore saying they're inferior fencing material and then that they have very little knowledge, seems sort of redundant if he's talking purely in terms of material quality, rather than material and moral, since it's because of their lack of knowledge that they're inferior fencing material. He tells them to "come at me bro" one by one, which doesn't necessarily mean they're going to sit tight and wait their turn rather than just trickling in at him in fairly rapid succession. All three defensive actions that Fiore performs could span the course of a minute or so, if these guys are as trash as he says. With regard to his boast about taking on 100, I thought that part was just him talking mad shit. Three at once I'd consider the limit, and even then the defender will probably receive mortal wounds (unless he really is a master).

But mostly I look at the art and the main issue I have is that if this is indeed just about "no matter the technique used, I'll beat it with my own technique" there's already dozens of other images depicting 1v1 fighting in the manuscripts. The same guard could be conveyed in any of those rather than a random pic of a "3v1 kinda, sorta, not really." Splitting those images up, few that they are, would not have broken the page space bank, so I choose to assume that these are examples of him implying he can go up against multiple foes when pressed.

Anyway, this is way off in the weeds now. If I'm wrong about what I'm seeing in Fiore, mea culpa, however he is not the only source that we could use. A German source MS 3227a (Other Masters Section) apparently talks at length about fighting 4-6 peasants from the Iron Gate guard. The translation is by Hans Stoeppler. Full transcript here, keyword search for Iron Gate. It should be noted that previous advice in the manuscript tells you to exercise prudence and avoid doing it, but regardless it exists as an addendum.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

Way to bore the fuck out of this thread. Fucking snorefest now.

ZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzz.......

 

[notpl]

Africa starts at the alps.

 

[Mauman]

Similar case with shield maidens; there is some evidence of shield maidens existing, therefore there must have been shield maidens everywhere. Instead of, you know, them being exceptionally gifted women when it came to fighting or simply charged with protecting the clan while the men were off raiding.

There's not one single recorded instance of a shield maiden going on out to fight or part of any organized fighting force. The "shield maiden" is a myth brought on by the rare instance of women having to fight to defend while the men were indisposed (either out raiding or whatever). Usually those women would get creamed too.

As for the "warrior woman" tomb that was mentioned earlier, that could be many things. It could have been a woman who died defending her home, or it could have been a woman who was raped and murdered. The woman would have been buried with her murderer's things (after said murderer was dealt with painfully). Or she could have been buried with the weapons/armor of her brother/father if they died out at sea. Point is there's a shitton of reasons a woman could be found buried with weapons and armor in viking culture, and none of them were "warrior woman".

If I'm wrong, I'm open to such things. Find me a recorded instance of a warrior woman in viking culture and I'll step back on this. Lord knows I've never found one :/

 

[Arbiter]

it would be demoralizing if you were a male caster

This is true irrespective of specific circumstance.

And after Chad has spent all his spells, Martial still has all his tools of the trade available, and Chad's only hope is that Martial trips and impales himself.

By that time all that remains of the martial is a wet stain on the floor.

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

This is why the motto of Martials must ever be: "Suffer not the Caster to live (or level)."

You must solve the problem early.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

This is why the motto of Martials must ever be: "Suffer not the Caster to live (or level)."

You must solve the problem early.

Solve early, solve often.

 

[Cael]

Pun Pun says you are too late.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Pun Pun says you are too late.

It's a kobold. By the time it gets to a level of competence the orc has already had him for dinner and second dinner.

 

[NecroLord]

"Great empires are not maintained by timidity."

Sure, but where are all those great empires now? "Live by the sword, die by the sword" and "you reap what you sow" come to mind.

Nothing is eternal,brother.
Greatness fades away,but the legends remain.

Huge empires were really difficult to manage.

 

[laclongquan]

I liked all female characters in ELEX, Witcher 1, Nehrim, and the Dungeon of Naheulbeuk.

Maybe the best female character I've ever encountered in any RPG was Theresa in the the Kingdom Come Deliverance DLC titled a Woman's Lot.

I found the portrayal of the female protagonist in the first Azure Bonds novel very good too.

What Isabella in DA2 and Viconia in BG, they interesting and hot?

Viconia is interesting in BG2 only. In BG1 her avatar is ugly, her stat is soso, and her place is out of the way. I rated her as less than the stoned cleric in the market.

It's in BG2 where she get a main quest, a better avatar, and an ending, that make her into a star.

A better avatar is the key, mind. Aerie got nearly same treatment but she can never get to be "everyone's little sister" that her design aim her at. Jaheira also doesnt get the "forbidden MILF" status that her design aim her at.
Jaheira's weird scale portrait vs Aerie's weird hair (dreadlock but not black) vs Viconia's nearly white and very beautiful portrait. Best portrait of BG series, even~

So yeah, that hotness is how~ Interesting? I dunno. I would rate Jaheira is most interesting (recent widow auntie superhot), then Viconia, then finally Aerie.

 

[laclongquan]

Technically, in magic setting the gender difference in physical stat is negated with the help of magic, from equipments to concoctions to spells.

Thus the concept of real-life wimmin only belong to the kitchen is not very approriate.

This is logic
(...)

If magic can make women as strong as a man, it could make a man even stronger yet. You could make an excuse as to why that would only apply to women, but that comes at the expense of verisimilitude; in which case you might have avoided giving an explanation altogether.

Stark fact in this matter is that we dont really care how magic make MEN stronger. We care about WOMEN, and how magic make them viable warrior. Stronger than men is not even come into question, because we dont care about that. We only care that magic make women warrior possible, is all~

Look at the tittle of the thread! Just fucking look at it.

 

[NecroLord]

Long story short,I wouldn't want to fight alongside a woman in a unit full of men. There can be a real brotherhood in a unit,you watch your comrade's back,train alongside them,eat with them and so on. But here comes a whamen disrupting the whole brotherhood.

 

[Sarathiour]

french isn't a real language, stop lying

Never tell rusty about the Normand .

 

[BruceVC]

Similar case with shield maidens; there is some evidence of shield maidens existing, therefore there must have been shield maidens everywhere. Instead of, you know, them being exceptionally gifted women when it came to fighting or simply charged with protecting the clan while the men were off raiding.

There's not one single recorded instance of a shield maiden going on out to fight or part of any organized fighting force. The "shield maiden" is a myth brought on by the rare instance of women having to fight to defend while the men were indisposed (either out raiding or whatever). Usually those women would get creamed too.

As for the "warrior woman" tomb that was mentioned earlier, that could be many things. It could have been a woman who died defending her home, or it could have been a woman who was raped and murdered. The woman would have been buried with her murderer's things (after said murderer was dealt with painfully). Or she could have been buried with the weapons/armor of her brother/father if they died out at sea. Point is there's a shitton of reasons a woman could be found buried with weapons and armor in viking culture, and none of them were "warrior woman".

If I'm wrong, I'm open to such things. Find me a recorded instance of a warrior woman in viking culture and I'll step back on this. Lord knows I've never found one :/

https://www.foxnews.com/science/fem...able-grave-sheds-new-light-on-ancient-society

Do you live in the Scandinavian countries? How much do you know about Viking tradition and culture

To quote from the link

" The experts also reiterated the woman’s warrior status. “In our opinion, Bj.581 was the grave of a woman who lived as a professional warrior and was buried in a martial environment as an individual of rank,” they wrote. “To those who do take issue, however, we suggest that it is not supportable to react only now, when the individual has been shown to be female, without explaining why neither the warrior interpretations nor any supposed source-critical factors were a problem when the person in Bj.581 was believed to be male.”

So no one questioned the legitimacy of this being a Viking warrior until it was revealed she was a women. It seems desperate dont you think? She was a warrior and like many other warriors she was buried in the traditional way?

 

[Cael]

Pun Pun says you are too late.

It's a kobold. By the time it gets to a level of competence the orc has already had him for dinner and second dinner.

Umm... Pun Pun goes off at level 1. Basically the instant you start the game, he is already having Bane for breakfast.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Pun Pun says you are too late.

It's a kobold. By the time it gets to a level of competence the orc has already had him for dinner and second dinner.

Umm... Pun Pun goes off at level 1. Basically the instant you start the game, he is already having Bane for breakfast.

Ah well. Any idiot eating a spell scroll for breakfast is no threat.

 

[Cael]

Similar case with shield maidens; there is some evidence of shield maidens existing, therefore there must have been shield maidens everywhere. Instead of, you know, them being exceptionally gifted women when it came to fighting or simply charged with protecting the clan while the men were off raiding.

There's not one single recorded instance of a shield maiden going on out to fight or part of any organized fighting force. The "shield maiden" is a myth brought on by the rare instance of women having to fight to defend while the men were indisposed (either out raiding or whatever). Usually those women would get creamed too.

As for the "warrior woman" tomb that was mentioned earlier, that could be many things. It could have been a woman who died defending her home, or it could have been a woman who was raped and murdered. The woman would have been buried with her murderer's things (after said murderer was dealt with painfully). Or she could have been buried with the weapons/armor of her brother/father if they died out at sea. Point is there's a shitton of reasons a woman could be found buried with weapons and armor in viking culture, and none of them were "warrior woman".

If I'm wrong, I'm open to such things. Find me a recorded instance of a warrior woman in viking culture and I'll step back on this. Lord knows I've never found one :/

https://www.foxnews.com/science/fem...able-grave-sheds-new-light-on-ancient-society

Do you live in the Scandinavian countries? How much do you know about Viking tradition and culture

To quote from the link

" The experts also reiterated the woman’s warrior status. “In our opinion, Bj.581 was the grave of a woman who lived as a professional warrior and was buried in a martial environment as an individual of rank,” they wrote. “To those who do take issue, however, we suggest that it is not supportable to react only now, when the individual has been shown to be female, without explaining why neither the warrior interpretations nor any supposed source-critical factors were a problem when the person in Bj.581 was believed to be male.”

So no one questioned the legitimacy of this being a Viking warrior until it was revealed she was a women. It seems desperate dont you think? She was a warrior and like many other warriors she was buried in the traditional way?

As you said: A male warrior is like many others. Normal. Boring. A female is different and worthy of a deeper look, and perhaps explore alternate theories.

If it weren't for the human need to delve deeper into something that is different, un usual, we'd all still be in caves cowering from the snarly thing in the dark.