Sorry about the double-post but since the most important things in each of these two posts are addressed to different people...
@Sivantic , I get the feeling that you're a bit upset about the situation, on top of anything else that's going on. I don't really understand all the mechanical details of how seidr works and since it's not directly relevant to my character I'm not sure I want to get too bogged down in the details of parsing it out, and I could be mistaken, but...
It seems like you have this image that no one can work magic without
extreme, disproportionate sacrifices, such that it effectively makes your character unable to work magic despite the fact that you really wanted to have a magic-oriented build.
The question on my mind is, "are all sacrifices great and terrible?" Mythologically speaking, the "trade this for that" archetype ranges all the way from "Odin trades an eye and a lot of wounding and getting hung from a tree for wisdom" down to "housewife trades a saucer of milk for help from a brownie/pixie/whatever." So there's a sliding scale here, maybe, and room to tie it all together into something that's still cool?
I was in fact able to send him out to go fishing
He even brought us back enough fish for the village that season after Galti died.
All it cost me was a passive and we have a rather large amount of passive actions available to us every season.
Well, in practice, there's not much difference between a passive action saying "an NPC associated with my PC does the thing" and a passive action saying "I do the thing" except when (1) Ordstirr is involved or (2) the passive action requires skills the PC logically wouldn't have but the NPC would or vice versa.
My passive NPCs regularly mention the activities of Erik Hardhead's family members for versimilitude, trying to make sure that I'm conscious of his household. I don't see why it'd be different for you just because you're playing the housewife with the husband who happens to be named Erik as an NPC while I'm doing it the other way around.
Hopefully Gambesons counts as worked skilled enough that not just anyone can make.
The problem with the gambesons would be that a gambeson takes a
lot of cloth. A lot. Like, 10x or 20x as much as a normal shirt, because it's literally just a whole lot of tightly woven cloth sewn together in layers until it functions as light body armor. Now, we as a village don't have a great primary production chain for cloth; it's kind of an irreplaceable resource for us. Gambesons are absolutely a good use of the material we do have, but one thing you might want to consider (others suggested this) is using a Passive action to go out and help Torgarr Villagefeeder's relatives cultivate the flax that Torgarr had sowed (or was going to sow) on his land.
With flax, we can make linen, which along with wool are the main forms of fabric in our society, with obvious benefits to you. And since we don't have any sheep, linen's our only real option.
You might also be able to get some of the flax seed and plant flax on your own land, or present that as your husband doing it.
While we're at it...
This post is also available in audio form, thanks to the efforts of our volunteer narrator. This is the third part of our four part (I, II, III, IVa, IVb) look at the production of textiles, partic…
acoup.blog
Weaving is big and cool, and spinning is by comparison low-prestige and labor intensive, but for the record, in these pre-industrial societies with traditional-ish gender roles, spinning treated flax fibers into thread that will later be woven into cloth is, like,
THE default baseline feminine activity. To the point where the phrase "distaff counterpart" refers specifically to the distaff, a tool women would use for spinning. And spinning. And spinning.
All the time. The invention of the spinning wheel reduced the amount of time women normally spent doing this, but we don't have those.
(Google fact- the Norse called the stars we know as "Orion's belt" to be "Frigg's distaff" instead)
To be clear, since we HAVE some cloth (salvaged from a sail, I gather), we CAN make gambesons without a lot of flax cultivation... for a while.
I'm sorry if you already know this, I just wanted to spell it out, partly to you and partly to anyone else who lacks the context or isn't clear on why everyone's geeking out about flax.
Unrelated thing, and notably I'm going to be just plain gone for about 10 hours after this so I'll be AFK...
I never really got a sanity check on what I was thinking here. I kind of need a sanity check from people who understand the context and cultural background a bit better.
...
Okay, so I'm planning to pick up where I left off with a major action that centers around runestones for our dead.
Now, just to be clear, we have two Final-Day all-dead guys now, Galti Sea-Rider (a.k.a. Hanison) and Torgarr Village-Feeder, right?
Galti's already turned into a draugr and attacked us, which makes it kind of pointless to make his runestone first to prevent that from happening. Torgarr, meanwhile, has not turned into a draugr and attacked us, so we'd better do something about that first.
Which is not to say Galti isn't getting a runestone, but a man's got to be practical when he only has one rock and is in a potentially ambiguous legal position getting it from a mostly-dead guy (Ivor Name-Giver) to commemorate an all-dead guy.
Am I making any sense here, or is this just my brain on sleepy?