>>5825025As anons said, her armor failed before her will to fight did. When the King's army came to relieve the garrison at Charlemont, she was one of a very small number of survivors they found in the field. They found her naked, scarred, and surrounded by a circle of dead Alansmen. She was straddling a fallen general with her lance through his chest, her back arched and her head lifted to the sky. A ray of sunlight piercing through the clouds like a spotlight upon her, and bright wildflowers bloomed upon the bloodsoaked circle around her where the light touched it the grass.
The chronicler that General Hermann brought with him thought it an impactful sight, so he made a quick study of it to be turned into the center of a painting commemorating the battle. When they realized that she was not deceased, the plan changed to a portrait commemorating the hero of the day who slew the enemy general and sent the Alansmen running.
Her reaction to seeing the first draft of the portrait was fainting. They decided to go with a draft that added (flattering, highly propagandistic) armor to her. When she commented later about being glad they redid it and got rid of the original, she learned that it was sold at a private auction with the funds going to war relief.
>>5825287As anon said here
>>5825598 armor v nude was really close (I miscounted last knight and found armor leading by 1), so I went with the middle option and erred on the side of keeping a tighter leash on the horny while still allowing it some slack.
>>5825294Yes. As with Knights and Nobles, both men and women can be ordained ministers. There is a tendency for priests to preside over ministries (local churches), while priestesses preside over shrines (holy sites that don't necessarily have a ministry), but this is not a hard and fast rule.
There are some things going on with the King and the Pope (and the Empress of Roses as well) in the background where they've been around for longer than one would expect.
>>5825376Yes and no. Both takes on the portrait were very much designed to be a propaganda piece. While her wounds had already healed over by the grace of the Light when they found her, it did leave her body riddled with scars. The artist depicted those scars as quite faint, and also made the choice to exaggerate her femininity in a number of ways (facial structure, proportions, etc.).
After fainting upon seeing the first draft, she decried the piece as pornography, though it should be noted that under both secular and religious law, it is not. Despite the nudity and the rather provocative pose she held whilst driving her lance through the fallen general, only depictions of congress and acts preparing for congress are classified as pornography under secular and religious law.
Louise knows this because she tried (and failed) to get it burned as pornography (and she has a habit of calling things pornography that are just risque).
