Atgxtg

THat was one of Moriens other suggestions. Replaceing the flat 10 points of glory awarded for minor crtical rolls to an amount equal to the character's APP. It's a minor difference but over time it could add up. But setting the social skills at APP/2 would only be a minor difference for most PKS, but give Lady characters a nice boost to their courtly skills.

Oh, okay. Then just to get you on the same page as the rest of us this idea is just for KAP5 which has some differences from KAP3/4. The double feint was removed, supposedly because PK couldn't use it due to the DEX penalty (which I never though should apply to the double feint, as it didn't apply to weapon being usef for the double feint), and becuase NPC PIcts were using it to slaughter PKs. I used to have a Roman Character who made heavy use of the tactic. Some big bruiser would laugh off the gladius/dagger and it's -1D6 damage only to have the weapon bypass half or all of his armor.

Yeah, I noticed that with standard chagen. If someone has a skill at 10 to start, it is not a good choice to "raise to 15" as the "+5 to any skill" would give the same result. The "raise to 15" option is obviously much better to use on a skill at a lower value. For one PK, who was squired to a Saxon ans was allowed to take Saxon skills instead of Cymric ones, the "raise to 15" was much more useful for low skills like Horsemanship and Sword than for higher skills, like 2H Weapons. Oh, and whwere the Stat/2 method should really make a major difference is with characters that are started off as squires. That's a whole new can of worms.

In theory, although as Morien's example points out, the ability to just set some skills to 15 at chargen kinda bypasses the baseline idea. Right now DEX and APP could be dropped from the game with little effect, especially with jerjeffwin's idea of using Hunting and Intrigue Only knockdown on foot would be affected much. Not only does this cause problems for those characters for which APP is supposed to be important (i.e. Ladies for whom all attributes are practically worthless). but the dump stat nature of DEX and APP means PKs have even more incentive to max out SIZ. If it weren't for the aging table, and the fear of being bedridden and dying from low attributes, the typical starting PK could easily be: SIZ 18, DEX 3, STR 18, CON 21, APP 3 We didn't intended on stat loss resulting is a reduction in skill. For several reasons, including simplify of use, once a skill is above STAT/2 it is essentially independent from the stat. Oh, logically it certainly makes sense for skills to decline or be limited somehow by attributes. That's why professional athletes can't compete forever - at least not at their peak performance level. They might have the same (or even greater) knowledge and skill as they had before, but don't have the physical ability to use the skill at the same level. Yes, it is one of the hurdles. In RQ/BRP we have INT and POW to use to help with skills. KAP doesn't and it makes some things more tricky. It partially why Greg couldn't get a "General Knowledge" skill to work. Basically what he wanted was something like an Idea roll, but as a skill it could become too broad and encompass everything. But we don't need to make every skill stat based, just do something to make DEX and APP useful. Thanks, appriciated. Its odd though that this thread was really supposed to test out a months old possible solution to the issue, but instead just seemed to bring up more debate than the original thread. Once again, I'll point out that I'd love to see other ways to address this issue. While there are some people who think everything is just great the way it is now, the consensus had seemed to be that APP is a dump stat, most PKs max out SIZ, and DEX isn't important. Considering how chargen has been going for my groups in KAP5+, I'm considering just giving the PKs 24 points to spend between SIZ and CON and dropping DEX, STR and APP.

Which would make DEX even less useful, as even more of it's functions are superseded. I'm not saying I'm opposed to your use of Hunting and Intrigue, only that it makes DEX even less important.

Yea! Some explames, thanks. I think I would too. It's a oint. Problem is though, APP probably wouldn't help many skills other than Flirting, but probably just influences how others behave. For instance the APP 22 lady probably inst any better at intrigue, but men might tell her things to try an impress her. So manybe she gets a little extra help when out hawking, opponents let her win, and so forth. Yeah, and it seems high DEX looses out worse than high APP, as there is more reason to use differernt courtly skills in a situation than there is to use different weapons. For example someone would flirt, gossip, play a game etc. a court, but a knight would have little reason to use sword, axe, mace, spear, flail, etc. in one fight. It's the easy chargen nature of the picks in KAP5. It's quicker and simplier than spending points from previous editions, but makes this rule variant kinda moot -at least with the RAW.

Yup, and tha'ts a valid argument. As a counter argument, I'll point out that with DEX/2 and APP/2 as a base people won't invest a few points into a skill, not only because they could be "lost" if the attribute is improved, but also because it's a waste of points. Somone who raises both Dance and Flirt from 5 to 6 is sorta wasting their points anyway, unless they like using a skill with a 70% chance of failure. DEX is nearly as useless as APP. Yes it does cover some Agility skills (Dancing and Boating are sperate skills) and and all Stealth skills from other BRP games, but knights don't use Agility skills much(other than the ones that remained skills) or Stealth at all in KAP. Even if they wanted to, which they probably wouldn't due to the armor penalty. And play an older edition, as the double feint tactic was removed from KAP. If I still existed, I probably wouldn't even have brought DEX into the conversation. It will still be a poor cousin to SIZ or CON, but Double Feint did keep DEX quite useful and relevant. But, apparently it caused problems. It's an idea. I really wouldn't mind if we reopened the original thread or started a new one to explore other alternative or solutions to the (alleged) problem of APP and DEX reatively low value in KAP, or even if a solution is needed. IMO Ladies need to get some game benefit from a high APP score. As it stands now, as noncombatants SIZ and STR are fairly meaningless for them, CON doesn't help them to survive their biggest life threatening circumstance, childbirth, DEX doesn't do anything for them, except maybe allow them to sneak up close enough to eavesdrop, and APP gets a lot of lip service but has no fictional value. A lady with APP 4 and high Courtly skills will completely dominate a lady with APP 20 and low Courtly skills. Worse still a lady with APP 4 and low Courtly skills can hold her own against a lady with APP 20 and low Courtly skills. At least with the defaults the APP4 character will have to work harder to make up for her low APP score, and the high APP character will get a little more social tolerance from her good looks. But again, this is the wrong thread for that, but I'm willing to consider other approaches.

Yeah, but I think that could play out just fine in a pseudo-historical Arthurian game. One of the nice things about Pendragon is that we have so much to work with. We have information, both historical and mythical from sources both modern and back at least 15 centuries to work with. It mostly comes down to just what sort of King Arthur and campaign the GM and players want. Quite a lot of the Arthurian lore is really optional. For example , you don't need Lancelot or the illicit romance. A campaign set around a group of Roman Equites/Cataphracti defending the remnants of Roman Britain could be an excellent Arthurian campaign.

I disagree. KAP1 certainly seemed to follow a sub-Roman view too, with a lot more Roman Names in use and Cadbury Castle as Camelot, and why the Romans as a people and military force continue to exist in the game. I think Pendragon could (and has) worked out fine for such a campaign. I think Greg's shift in empahsis from KAP1 to KAP 3/4 was becuase of his love of Mallory's work. KAP5 seemed to be shifting thing further towards a more feudal, Norman Britain with more of the dark and gritty historical stuff coming back, even if it was from a later period of history. Personally, I'm for starting the campaign more Roman-post Roman in flavor and having the culture evolve through the Periods.

You're not completely rewrting character generation. They are nearly worthless. 5 points of DEX do not equal 1 point of SIZ or CON. As does STR. With 10 points of DEX needed for 1 point of Movement, and DEX on a 3-18 range the difference between a high dex and a low one is 1 point of Move. That hardly matches up with SIZ, CON or STR.. Furthermore Move is a pretty weak stat for a knight, who is going to be mounted in most fights and rely on his horse's move score instead. Which themselves do nothing and have no function in the game. Then why bothering using game mechanics to track it? Really, the whole "why don't you just roleplay it" objection doesn't hold water. Why don't we just roleplay sword duels, jousts, singing, and every other facet of the game? THey could all be handled through roleplaying just as well as APP can. Probably easier, as we have more common ground as to what constitutes a high SIZ or STR than we do with something as subjective as APP. And roleplaying wise, I've yet to see a guard being seduced into looking the other way by an APP score (KAP uses traits for that) or APP having any impact in the game other than bragging rights among the players for who scored with or wedded the prettiest girl. The point is that: 1) DEX is nearly useless in game, so nobody spends character points on it. It's major function in the game for knights is to resist knockdown. There are some other uses but most of those won't be attempted by armored knights, and probably not by unarmored knights either. 2) APP is virtually useless. Other than its being used for seating at feasts, and to resist the effects of aging by spreading around the point loss, it serves no function and could be dropped and replaced with a character description. Both of these things lead to players pretty much ignoring or even buying low on DEX and APP in order to have more points to spend on STR, CON and especially SIZ. Another problem with this is with lady characters for whom APP and DEX tend to be thier best stats. In game terms Lady Grocery Bag (APP 4, Flirt 15) is going to be more successful than Lady Helen (APP 22, Flirt 4). But if neither of those are enough for you, consider this: If the stats serve no significant purpose then removing them would streamline and simply the game making it easier to play. APP is about as useful in Pendragon as Armor Class is. Few games have stats that serve no game purpose, like APP does. Even something like D&D, where CHA isn't all that important for most characters, still has use among Bards, Sorcerors and Paladins. In KAP the APP stat isn't useful to anybody. Then you probably haven't considered lady player character much. As they stand now, attributes are nearly pointless for them. That high APP that is supposed to be important in some way, isn't. Courtly skills completely override APP and DEX. Okay. I don't mind discussing or debating this, but this isn't supposed to be the thread for that. We had a thread for that awhile back. This is supposed to be a thread for testing the idea out and seeing what the results look like. I'd honestly love to see you write up a character or two using this alternate method and use it to validate your objections.

I had heard of a Book of Salisbury, too. Hope something come out, I'm starting to suffer withdrawal.

I don't see how it fixes the problem though, as all Knights (and all Ladies) would have the same defaults. We'd still be left with APP as a dump stat, and DEX nearly one. The 0 starting skill is a different problem (and IMO not as important as a PK does at least have some options, according to the RAW, while APP is next to useless). To drudge up my original complaint, if APP Is only going to serve as descriptive text in the game, why bother tracking it as an attribute?

Yup, or just by using the difference in the rolls. Like if the opponent beasts you by 10+ or 15+ he gets past your shield. In some ways that could be better that the KAP RAW as it will not make shields automatic for highly skilled knights. And if the same mechanic were applied for critical success (i.e. the difference), it would allow the game to handle very high scores better.

Ah, I was responding to Tizun Thane's suggestion, which was much simpler. Also interesting. Modified DEX does address some of the problems, although I'm still not sold on the idea. A high DEX character with a good skill and a shield could become much more tougher than someone in the appropriate armor. I'm not saying it won't work, but I have reservations.

BTW, debates like this are exactly why I've been asking for people to create and post characters using this variant of chargen. That way we can all see the big picture and how much raising DEX or APP will mater compared to the corresponding reduction in SIZ, CON, STR and/or skill points. Does a character with DEX 18, and a default of 9 in physical skills really have that much of an advantage? In chargen? in play? Obviously it's all about trade offs, but we don't really know yet if the pros balance out with the cons.

Well, when I played GURPS it did shock a lot of people that my 18 DEX character had a higher skill with their weapons, by default, than they had after spending points on those skills. IMO the default should be capped somewhere, much like in GURPS Supers, but probably a bit lower than in Supers and maybe vary based on the difficulty of the skill. But as far a KAP goes, I think the GURPS method wouldn't work that well, as the normal attribute range in KAP is much greater than in GURPS (where attributes tend to closer around the 7-15 range). Yup, but probably also would give greater reason for just changing things to a D20+modifiers. The standard pass/fail game mechanic of KAP/BRP becomes unnecessary and can just be replaced with an opposing value (rolled or fixed).

Advancement is handled normally, that is as if the skill has a value equal to it's default score. For example, if a Knight had DEX 10, and thus Axe (5) he would be treated just like any other character with Axe (5). If that character got a skill check with axe and rolled to improve it later it would go up from 5 to 6. Also, if the Knight raised his DEX from 10 to 11 then the defualt for any DEX based skills would go from 5 to 6. THis would not change any DEX based skill that was already 6 or higher. I assume you mean cultural skills such as Spear Expertise or Two Handed Weapons. Those skills are tied to culture, so someone would have to be a Cymric knight (or at least fostered by/squired to one) to get Spear Expertise, although the default would tend to make that Meta-skill moot during chargen. But it would still be useful for advancment purposes. The character benefits from the high stat. Now you might think this is an unfair adfvantage, but is it? Look at the advatage that a high SIZ character gets, more hit points, higher knockdown, higher damage stat, and compare it to the high DEX character. Then consider that in standard chargen characters are built from a pool of points, so a high DEX will come at the cost of a lower SIZ, STR and CON. On top of that breadth of combat skills is as important as depth. What I mean is that having a 5 or even a 9 in a lot of skills like dagger, greatspear, flail, mace, etc. isn't as good as having a 20 skill in any one lelee weapon (like sword, spear or axe). Yup, and IMO that's a good thing. The whole point of the different starting skills is cultural identity. That a German Knight has a Axe skill of 9 is nearly meaningless, because the knight wouldn't leave it at 9, or wouldn't rely on it is battle if he did leave it at 9. Likewise any of the Knights who started with it at 0 would spend time improving it before they would consider using it, except in an emergency. A difference of a couple of points in a skill, especially one that isn't going to be used much (if at all) due to the low rating is really just more bookseeping for an alleged benefit that won't show up in play. For an example of this look at older version of RQ supplements, such as Apple Lane. Originally all the minor NPCs such as the various Baboons each got their own write ups, with attribute and skill scores that varied a little from one to the next to try to individualize them. In later editions only the leader got such treatment and the rest were given generic stats. In play, players are usually not going to notice if an NPC has a 11 STR or a 12, or has club at 30% or 35%. Likewise in KAP it doesn't really matter much if one culture gets Sing 3 and another Sing 5- the difference isn't going to be noticeable unless they are doing over 20 singing rolls a session, and it would have to be well over 20 rolls for a 12 point difference to be attributed to a difference in skill and not other factors. Is it worse? First off to beast that 5 or 6 skill a character would have to have a 13 or better DEX, and that would come at the expense of one of his other attributes (SIZ, STR, CON or APP). A knight who starts off with a 15 DEX and a default of 8 with any weapon skill is probably still going to get his head handed to him by a knight who starts off with SIZ 16, DEX 10, Sword 15 and 5d6 damage.

Interesting, although I think that causes more problems. It makes armor a minor upgrade or even a downgrade for most characters. Who would wear 4-6 point leather? It also tends to make everybody rather arrow resistant. I'd much rather give weapons a protection score and tie it to a partial success.

Yup, and as written KAP tends to downplay stealth, wits, charm and social interaction. Stealth = DEX Wits is entirety up to the player Charm has a couple of skills that can play a part (Folklore, Flirting, Courtesy)

But GURPS uses a bell curve, so DEX-4 will mean very different things for a character with a 10 DEX (default 6, or about 9%) and one with an 18 DEX (default 14 or around a 91% success chance).

Yup. In mine it should probably depend on just what he is attemtping and how difficult or easy it is. Yes the game does have modifiers to skill rolls, but thhey don't always fit the situation, especially with opposed rolls. Except that with the way KAP works, it's an ineffective attack that doesn't even have to be defended against -even by incompetent fighters.

LOL! Like you said you missed the discussion. The reasoning behind it was that as currently constructed APP is pretty much a dump stat and DEX nearly so (it's major use for PKs is less important if the character has a high SIZ and superseded by Horsemanship skill if in the character is mounted). With the idea of making Lady characters more useful and playable APP needed an upgrade. By RAW is does practically nothing. On a similar note an 18 DEX isn't in the same league as an 18 STR let alone an 18 CON or SIZ. The idea of using half of DEX or APP as a default was designed to balance out those attributes against the others. The idea being that a player knight with an 18 DEX would start off with a lot of high combat skills and be on the fast track to knighthood and success and (hopefully) hold his own, long term, against a PK with an 18 SIZ. Using APP/2 would give ladies with a high APP something worth having. Stat/3 or /4 might be a better fit for an RQ type game, where the attributes play a factor in other things (such as skill improvement), but still leaves DEX and APP as dump stats in KAP. Stat/2 would up as the "most popular compromise" solution to the dump stat situation, not the ideal solution. The idea of this thread is to get people trying out the variant rule to see if it actually works out as intended, especially when used by multiple people in something akin to "field conditions". My thinking it I'd rather find out it it works or not now rather than a year or two from now, after it might have worked its way into something official. So consider this a challenge to try and break this alternate chargen system! Better it doen by one of us that some stranger! (okay, okay so there is no one stranger, just people we don't know).

Maybe TSR's old SAGA system. Although it used cards instead of dice (it could easily have used a D10 and some sort of critical rule instead of the cards), and just treated everything as a modifier tot he final result, it worked.Opposed results were just compared and the higher result was the winner and did the difference in damage to the loser. FUDGE/FATE is similar is directly comapring results and having "default" results for each skill level, including unskilled, as did Castle Falkestein. You could get a good idea of how it would work by using D20's Die+modifiers game mechanic with Pendragon's resolution, except you'd need to redefine partial success and failure (probably based on the difference between the winning and losing result). Not that I'm advocating doing so, just giving an example.

Yeah. The thing with skills \is that they tend to note not only relative skill but absolute skill and chance of success, but, realistically some things are much easier to do than others. Pretty much anybody can hit someone with a melee weapon almost all the time, if the opponent isn't trying to prevent it. If they are, then it gets more complicated and drawn out. The old RQ/KAP model of low skill fighters missing/failing with most of their attacks doesn't really hold up to scrutiny. I could easily see allowing the winner of a "failed" opposed roll to do normal damage. In real life I once clocked a friend in the side of the head really well with a shinai that way. I was actually swings to one side of him, to get him to step in the other direction (in RQ terms a feint, or "failed" attack roll), but he did a circular parry and turned what should have been a miss to his right side into a hit on his right side (basically he fumbled his parry).

Oh, agreed, a lot of it comes down to people trying stuff that they would never risk in areal fight because they aren't going to get killed in a practice fight. In my particular case one of the reasons why I was more successful that I should have been was becuase I am left handed and stepped in a locked weapons in a way that a right hander wouldn't have. Then I had a knack for hitting his arm when he stepped back to disengage. It was more of a relfex move than an actual attack, but it wasn't something he expected from a novice. Mostly bad habits I picked up from old Errol Flynn movies!