Link an historical character to the cited advantage

[mr beer]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

Rustam couldn't have wielded a 110 pound mace.

That too. 110lbs mace, 1 handed...sounds a bit like some of the miraculous feats of the contemporary Kim dynasty.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by mr beer

That too. 110lbs mace, 1 handed...sounds a bit like some of the miraculous feats of the contemporary Kim dynasty.

You mean like hitting 19 holes in one in an 18 hole course?

[AlexanderHowl]

Actually, Monroe probably had Allure 4, Appearance (Beautiful), Charisma 2, and Voice (she actually had a sweet voice). When she was interacting with people who do not find women attractive, she would have received a +6 reaction, but she would have received a +12 when interacting with people who find women attractive.

I tend to be more skeptical about appearance. I think that 1:10 people are Attractive, 1:1,000 people are Beautiful/Handsome, 1:1,000,000 people are Very Beautiful/Very Handsome, and that only 1:10,000,000,000 people are Transcendent. I think that 1:10 people are Unattrative, 1:100 are Ugly, 1:1,000 are Hideous, and 1:10,000 are Monstrous. I think that the perks of Classic Features and Photogenic are quite common though, with 10% of people having either and 1% of people having both.

[mr beer]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

You mean like hitting 19 holes in one in an 18 hole course?

Yep exactly.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by jason taylor

I'll bite. Paul Heinreid, Christopher Plummer, Peter O'Toole and as a Dark Horse David Dukes (not to be confused with David Duke).

Mythologically, of course, there's Adonis.

In modern times, Christopher Reeves. He basically got into Juilliard's Advanced Program because he was so good-looking in addition to being an excellent actor (his classmate and friend, Robin Williams, got in on - no surprise - raw comedic talent).

Historically, paragons of (Western) male beauty have been Lord Byron, Beau Brummel, Rudolf Valentino, Clark Gable, Cary Grant, Elvis Presley, Paul Newman, Brad Pitt, etc.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

Actually, Monroe probably had Allure 4, Appearance (Beautiful), Charisma 2, and Voice (she actually had a sweet voice).

I'd mostly agree with this, although depending on how point-restricted you want to get, I'd knock down the levels of Allure and Charisma.

Monroe was charming in person, but never much of a leader or a social manipulator, so Charisma could be knocked out entirely.

Due to changes in cultural and historical beauty standards, and personal preferences, we could go around all day over the Beautiful/Very Beautiful standard. By modern standards of Hollywood beauty, she's too fat and not toned enough. But, Monroe is often used as a paragon of female beauty in studies of sexual dimorphism. She's got all the markers for what, pretty much universally, across western culture, corresponds with female attractiveness.

Voice is an obvious ad, for the reason you mention and the fact that she could turn on that absolutely iconic "sex kitten" breathy voice.

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

I tend to be more skeptical about appearance. I think that 1:10 people are Attractive, 1:1,000 people are Beautiful/Handsome, 1:1,000,000 people are Very Beautiful/Very Handsome, and that only 1:10,000,000,000 people are Transcendent. I think that 1:10 people are Unattractive, 1:100 are Ugly, 1:1,000 are Hideous, and 1:10,000 are Monstrous.

Thinking about it, I'd have to agree with you about good appearance, although I'd reserve Transcendent appearance for fictional or mythological characters like Galadriel or Venus.

Bad appearance is much more common due to the effects of age, disease, ill-health, and injury. There aren't too many good-looking people walking around in retirement homes or burn wards.

For young adult populations, however, where everyone is more or less as good-looking as they're ever going to be in their lives, your ratios are probably accurate.

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

I think that the perks of Classic Features and Photogenic are quite common though, with 10% of people having either and 1% of people having both.

Agreed. Same for the reverse for Non-Photogenic Features.

Statuesque might be about as common as Handsome/Beautiful, generally, the same factors which make a sexy body make a sexy face.

I'd argue that your typical runway model isn't likely to be Very Beautiful but instead some combination of (Attractive or Beautiful) + (Classic Features and/or Photogenic) + (Skinny and/or Social Stigma (Minor)).

[khorboth]

In defense of Murad IV, the mace does exist and does weigh about 110 lbs. It seems to be accepted based on historical accounts, both from his allies and his foes that he wielded the monstrous thing one-handed. I'm afraid I don't have real research handy as it's been a while since I really looked it up. As for wrestling multiple foes, these accounts were from within his court, and he was not the most mentally stable or tolerant fellow, but tended toward killing those who showed dishonor rather than killing those who disagreed with him.

There certainly are theories that the mace in question was for ceremonial purposes or executions or for impressing visiting officials. Then there would be another one, presumably lighter, which he used when leading his troops in battle or prowling the streets incognito killing those he caught violating his bans on smoking or coffee (not mentally stable). Those theories are not ascendant, though. The prevailing theory is that he used the really heavy mace in one hand to do some serious head-smashing.

Isn't this precisely the kind of top-of-possiblity thing we're looking for?

[khorboth]

For appearance, how about Jules Leotard? I know we're still euro-centric, but he was the inspiration for the song ""The Daring Young Man on the Flying Trapeze" and had a tendency to woo otherwise stable, sensible married women just based upon his appearance and performance. He invented a garment (the leotard) to better display his physique and allow him better movement. There are pictures available, but I'm unable to be a real judge of the attractiveness of men.

Unfortunately, I think appearance is greatly influenced by culture and personal taste, so I'm not sure there's a clear answer.

For will, how about Giles Corey? He was pressed to death rather than entering a plea during the Salem Witch trials. He chose a slow, painful death over a quick merciful one in order that his family would receive an inheritance?

[talonthehand]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Aren't all of these modern men whose pictures can be seen readily online? I was looking for men whose name got into premodern legends. Got an example?

I'd mention, by the way, that when I ask Duck Duck Go for images of attractive men, what I get seems incredibly European (including American) centered. I see very few Iranians, for example, though to my tastes they're one of the most attractive human ethnicities physically. Nor do I see many East Asians, though they're a huge share of the human population. Though of course some of the same biased sampling turns up in legends, because most of us don't know Asian, African, or indigenous American legends in anything like the same depth.

Ariwara no Narihira may be a good case - sort of a Japanese version of Casanova. Might be a better example of lechery with a really low self control roll though.

[mr beer]

Originally Posted by khorboth

In defense of Murad IV, the mace does exist and does weigh about 110 lbs. It seems to be accepted based on historical accounts, both from his allies and his foes that he wielded the monstrous thing one-handed. I'm afraid I don't have real research handy as it's been a while since I really looked it up. As for wrestling multiple foes, these accounts were from within his court, and he was not the most mentally stable or tolerant fellow, but tended toward killing those who showed dishonor rather than killing those who disagreed with him.

There certainly are theories that the mace in question was for ceremonial purposes or executions or for impressing visiting officials. Then there would be another one, presumably lighter, which he used when leading his troops in battle or prowling the streets incognito killing those he caught violating his bans on smoking or coffee (not mentally stable). Those theories are not ascendant, though. The prevailing theory is that he used the really heavy mace in one hand to do some serious head-smashing.

Isn't this precisely the kind of top-of-possiblity thing we're looking for?

Sure, but I'm highly sceptical about claims of objectively miraculous feats from historical figures who also just happened to be absolute tyrants.

So routinely defeating multiple wrestlers at one time is possible but the balance of probabilities favour the likelihood that they took a dive rather than, say, break the Sultan's wrist or ram an elbow into his sacred groin. I think they fought hard enough to put up a show but not to win, that includes waiting around for their 'turn' a bit like in the movies when the hero beats up crowds of mooks.

A human wielding a 110lbs mace one handed as a useful fighting weapon is not at all plausible IMO. A strong enough man could swing it clumsily or use it to dispatch a stationary foe, that's it. And they would have to be seriously strong to even do that. I am in decent shape and can lift that kind of weight clear of the floor with one hand, but no more than that. I'd need two hands to get it overhead.

Contrast to the heaviest widely used historical weapons, items in the 10lbs+ range, that kind of weight in a stick-like form is trivial for me to lift two handed (like any other able bodied adult) and I can wave around a bit but probably not wield it deftly. So that suggests to me that a 110lbs mace is well beyond human strength to use as a weapon.