rust

... but on the other hand, every hero in the litertature seems to have something of note. Usually several things.

I have no problem with this if the hero has to earn this something during the campaign, or if

it is balanced by something like for example a specific geas connected with a magic item, but

I would hesitate to give out lots of powers, spells and items during character creation.

There is also the problem of "power creep" for the adventures, because very powerful charac-

ters also need very powerful opponents, and the more powerful the characters become during

the campaign, the more this spirals into realms where only deities can still provide a challenge

for the heroes.

It is doubtless a matter of taste, but I prefer to begin a character's "hero's journey" at the be-

ginning, when he still is heroic because he voluntarily takes significant risks, and not nearer to

the end, when there is not much left that could endanger him.

Thank you very much, Pachristian, I will take a look at these books.

That is an excellent question. One which I would like to round table.

As far as I understand it, rare and wondrous magic seems to fit the feel of the literature better than a

setting where everyone and his brother and sister can cast spells and carry magic items.

Besides, omnipresent magic could "devalue" the magical abilities of the inhabitants of the Otherworld

as well as the stature of the legendary magic users like Taliesin, whose deeds would become much

less impressive if so many other people could have done the same.

I think the reason for the lack of Irish and Scottish shipping is becuase of the Vikings. By the end of the Viking age, I don't thing the Sots and Isish were doing as much seafaring as they used to.

Yes, this seems very plausible. Anyway, I am glad that there were at least some Gaelic ships

on the North Atlantic in the 13th century, this adds a number of interesting options to the set-

ting - although I obviously have to do some more research on the Lordship of the Isles and its

society and culture to understand what exactly these options could be ...

North American fisheries = trade secret Shhhhhhh!

That much about an undisturbed life in lonely colonies on remote islands ...

Thank you for the interesting map.

The regions in central Scotland with their names in light brown (e.g. Fortriu) are Pictish ?

... to travel back and forth between the two islands ...

Thank you very much for this, it reminded me of what I had missed, because "between the two

islands" was the Lordship of the Isles, and this is the region I should have researched.

Now on the right track, I found some very interesting informations, and they even fit very well

into my setting.

To quote Wikipedia:

"Birlinns are known to have traversed much of the length of the Irish Sea, and to have reached Shetland. Oral history frequently refers to voyages to Rockall, Brittany, northern Norway, Iceland, and, rarely, even Greenland."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birlinn

I am hoping to create it in a team approach.

I suspect this is a bit too far in time from my usual "playgrounds", so I would not be able to

contribute anything useful. However, I would very much like to see this project develop.

While working on my Thule setting, I ran into a problem which my "Google Fu" seems unable

to solve: There seem to be no Irish or Scottish seafarers in the Middle Ages.

Both Ireland and Scotland are "neighbours" of my setting's Thule (= Greenland), and so some

encounters with ships from these lands and perhaps also some sea trade seem likely and also

would add some more "colour" to the setting.

However, despite the apparent Irish seafaring tradition of the "Dark Ages" (St. Brendan, Irish

monks on Iceland, etc.) and the very obvious Scottish seafaring tradition of the early modern

age, I was unable to find any mention of Irish or Scottish seafarers during the Middle Ages,

especially the 13th century.

Perhaps someone could tell me whether I only managed to miss such informations (and where

to look for it), or whether there really were no Irish or Scottish ships, for example whalers, on

the North Atlantic during this period ?

Thank you very much for any help.

I think you need an external enemy - one that would simply destroy the colony if both lords and peasants do not cooperate to make it survive - to keep things together in a realistic way.

Yes, I see the problem. One such "enemy" could be the harsh environment of Thule combined

with the small size of the colony, forcing knights and peasants to work together to survive. And

I am also working on some aggressive natives who are likely to attack the foreigners whenever

there is an opportunity to do so, giving the knights an appreciated role as protectors of the pea-

sants. And finally there is the option to fill up the ranks of the knights with those peasants who

did something outstanding for the colony, creating a small but steadily growing "middle class"

of Baltic knights (and enabling the players to choose one of the newly created Baltic knights as

a player character to "experience the other side").

Isuspect you can't "muscle" a foil past a parry the way you can with a heavier blade.

Well, lets put it this way: One of the most feared rapier fencers of France's 17th century was

Julie le Maupin, a slender woman who was often mistaken for a boy - she once won a serious

fight against three men at the same time ...

Rust I am adding you to my friends list!!! I like your idea....

Thank you very much.

Since fantasy is not really my field, I have no useful opinion on which system would be best

for the scenario and supplement you envision.

My only idea for this would be to take a look at the magic system of the Fourth Edition of Pen-

dragon (I do not know the later editions), because I have the impression that it captures the

feel of the Celtic literature quite well and could therefore provide some ideas for Celtic magic

for other systems, too.

I also like it because in my view it is less "mechanical" than most of the other magic systems

("Press Button A for Result X"), more open and unpredictable.

Let me see ...

Your king and his only son are dying of the Yellow Plague of Rhos, and once they are dead and

their royal line has ended, the king of a neighbouring realm will invade and subjugate your ho-

meland.

The only man who ever was able to heal the Yellow Plague has died many years ago, and he

was buried together with the fairy chalice that enabled him to brew the potion that healed the

plague. You could steal the chalice from his mound, but you would not know how to use it and

what ingredients are needed for the potion.

You have to go to Annwn to ask the dead healer, but the only way there is through a henge on

the lands of the neighbouring king, who will do whatever he can to prevent your success, with

means fair and foul, including magic.

If you manage to reach Annwn, the Lord of the Underworld will only allow you to speak with the

dead healer if you and your companions win a series of challenges against his servants, from

bardic tale to duel combat - one challenge for each member of the group.

Should you and your companions win the majority of the challenges, the healer will agree to tell

you what you need to know, and where to find the ingredients for the potion.

Now all you have to do is to return through the henge, where the enemy king's best warriors

are already waiting to kill you ...

okay changing gears in the thread.... Brp with or without hit locations?

If you prefer a more gritty game, hit locations would be fine, but if you aim for a more heroic-

cinematic game, total hit points might fit better. It is a matter of taste, I usually prefer total hit

points, in my view they make the game a bit more "rules light" and fast and the characters a

bit less vulnerable - however, they also make combat more simplistic, and do not go well hand

in hand with a detailed combat system with many tactical options and thelike.

I believe that Arthu is a composite of several characters, both historical and otherwise.

This is my view, too. I think that someone named Arthur - more likely a nickname "Bear" than

a real name - lived somewhen between 450 BC and 550 BC in Wales, most likely in northern

Wales, and that this person became well known (if not proverbial - "like Arthur") as a good

warrior, perhaps a good leader of warriors.

Later on many stories were "retconned" and connected with this Arthur, "like Arthur" became

"in Arthur's time", "among Arthur's men" and "at Arthur's court", and real or legendary people

from other sources were connected with the now legendary Arthur, who steadily increased in

stature and importance and "assimilated" more and more real history and legends.

In the high and late Middle Ages, when the idea of chivalry was developed, Arthur became the

"perfect Christian knightly king", and the many old and new and widely differing stories about

and around him were finally interconnected and "canonized" into Mallory's Arthur, now more a

romantic figure than a Welsh warrior - the Pendragon Arthur, with few traces of the post-Ro-

man Welsh warrior left.

If I had to bet who the model for "the real Arthur" could have been, I would most probably put

my money on Owain Dangwyn or someone very close to him in time and place - in my view just

the right time and place.

However, I would very much hesitate to make this bet, because all that is just what I consider

most plausible, and history does not always follow the concept of highest plausibility, so it could

just as well have been completely different.

... who became humanised and historicised by later writers.

It depends on what you consider as "later". It is a bit suspicious that the previously very uncom-

mon name "Arthur" suddenly became rather fashionable in the Celtic regions around 600 AD,

while there is no earlier trace of any old Celtic deity with that or a similar name.

In any case, Arthur was a well established figure long before Mallory. I remember visiting the

Norman cathedral in Otranto in Apulia in southern Italy, which has a truly fascinating mosaic

floor that depicts hundreds of stories. This mosaic was created in 1163 AD, and Arthur figures

very prominently in it - hundreds of years before and hundreds of miles away from Mallory.

Well put

I thought of this because Gildas called another person of the time "You Bear", the Welsh

king (?) Cynlas Goch.

Maybe what you say is true in fencing, with the greater swordplay, but it certainly doesn't hold true for medieval weapons.

This may be true, my only personal experience is indeed with fencing weapons.

Some scholars have pointed out that Gildas may have omitted it for political reasons. After all he was very busy pointing out the other rulers flaws.

And another option: Gildas was aware or assumed that Artus, "The Bear", was a nickname of a person, and

did not know the real name ...

Not really. All attacks are really aimed strikes. It's not like you swing your sword wondering where the blow is going to land.

True, but one usually aims at a location that has been made possible by the development of

the ongoing combat, for example because of an opening in the opponents's defence.

One can aim at the head whenever such an opportunity presents itself, and there are ways

to create such opportunities for specific hit locations (feints and thelike), but it is extremely

difficult to hit such a location at any other moment of the combat.

In other words: The swordsman can say "I will aim for the head at the first chance to do so"

and succeed, but he will rarely succeed with the plan "I will aim at the head with my next strike".

As for Gildas, he doesn't mention Arthur at all. A somewhat curious omission as if there were a historical Arthur he would have been aware of it.

Well, Gildas mentions the Battle of Mount Baden, which the Historia Brittonum mentions as one

of Arthur's battles, but Gildas does not give the name of the military leader who commanded

the British forces in that battle. However, these forces doubtless had a leader, and since Gildas

does not provide any other name of that commander, it could just as well have been Arthur.

I have to ask why Arthur is such a sticking point with so many people when I have posted about several other documented personalities....

Because you titled the thread "Age of Arthur BRP" ?

Seriously, while this is still not my preferred historical period, I could well imagine to play at

least a short campaign in it, for example dealing with the post-Roman culture in northern Wa-

les, where a kind of Roman civilization continued to exist even after the Roman Empire had

fallen.

Thank you very much for the informations.

But most important of all, remember that the Balts are free spirits. They have resisted assimilation by both German and Russian culture for countless centuries. Do not underestimate this.

This made me think of the computer game Europa Universalis. It has an event named "Culture

Shift", where the foreign ruling class of a country (for example Hospitallers on Malta) adopts the

culture of their subjects. Perhaps I should make the possibility of such a culture shift from the

knights' German culture towards a mixed German-Baltic or even predominantly Baltic culture a

part of my campaign.

At the end of the game, the players found my rule too harsh.

I would have no problem with your rule. It is rather difficult to hit a specific location during a

combat, because the opponent usually does his best not to cooperate with such an attempt,

and the head is the one hit location a normal opponent tries to protect by any means - to hit

it should therefore be very difficult, I think.

Two questions about details of the setting, just to make sure that I did understand it right:

Both crossbow and long spear (or any similar kind of polearm) were not used by the natives of

the Amber Coast ?

This could become important for my Thule setting, because I think these would be the weapons

best suited for hunting a walrus, which could make a very difficult prey when only light bows or

smaller hand weapons are available.

The peasants under the rule of one of the German knightly orders were usually allowed to have

weapons and practice with them, because they often served as auxiliaries ?

This is also a question for the Thule setting, to determine whether the peasants moved to Thu-

le can be expected to have any weapon skills at all, useful both for hunting and perhaps for ho-

stile encounters with Thule's natives (or during revolts against the knights ...).

Thank you.