Atgxtg

Yeah, I suppose someone could hire teachers to get checks in the opposing traits, but that would just make te character regress towards the mean. Maybe the teachers could just offset the negative checks? So if someone didn't care about the lustful check they could still make £1.

I'm sorry, but I don't see the difference between 20 (+2) and just having a 22. What am I missing?

Well a check in the game mean checking the box for improvment later. So it's as if the player already made a roll. He would have to worry because as written there is no roll, he'd just automatically get an improvement check for Cowardly each year. Since Cowardly would be at 0, the player would obviously rolled higher than a zero and it would go up at the end of the year. So by RAW, if he builds a coneygarth, his Valor is going to drop.

No, there isn't. But in a way feats are like tournaments. While a GM could have the PKs do the tourney circuit and go to a half dozen (or more) tournaments in a given year, no GM I know has even done so. Ultimately it comes down to how much time do you want to spend at tournaments as opposed to doing something else. Same with feasts. If the GM runs a half dozen feasts each year using the feat system, then there isn;t going to be much time to do anything else, and the typical glory awards are going to be pretty low, about 3-10 per feast. Yes some PKs might sit "Above the Salt" and net the extra 100 Glory, and one PK will be most congenial and get 70-150 glory or so, but most PKs are getting a pittance. Oh, one other thing that I think might be an improvement would be for the GM to generate some sort of Geniality Threshold for the PKs to win. As it stands now the PK with the highest Geniality is declared the most congenial Knight at the feast, regardless of whatever any of the NPKs are doing. I had one or two feats where a PK won by default, being the only player left at the feast, due to feast event cards. It would seem to make sesne to me if a NPK could win the award once in awhile. Maybe some sort of random die roll to see how the NPKs are doing?

Although...thinking about it, such trait rolls should probably be optional. The whole point behind allegorical beast trait checks is that the character gets to observe the animal's behavior, and it is not like the knight actually has to go take care of the rabbits personally. I don't really see Lancelot losing his courage because he was granted a manor with some bunnies! Especially if it were some manor that he never actually spent any time at. So I'd probably at least consider letting the PK avoid the rabbits, and skip BOTH trait checks.

Like Morien noted for the most part this PK is going to be fearless, and yes that is exactly how the system was designed. But... Per p. 91 of the Book of the Estate, Coneygarth gives a check to Lustful and Cowardly, not a roll. That means that mister fearless is going to have to check is Cowardly trait, which is certain to go up to 1 during the winter phase, and knock his Valor back down to 19. So he should not build a Coneygarth

I think I've seen three. I'm just being proactive about it. If this is supposed to be the "best" feast of the year, it won't be a problem. I was just thinking about what happens if and when all my PKs get knighted and have libra to burn, and each could throw a feast a year or some such silliness. The funny bit is that the feast is something of a red herring. The actual adventure this year is going to occur during the hunt prior to the feast, and the whole feast could get delayed or scrapped depending on what happens to the PKs during the hunt. Not that they know that. Thanks. I haven't had any real problems with it yet, but know my players, and if they think they can get 100 Glory by spending £2 for a feast, then they will try to hold more feasts. If that happens I'll either have to scale the awards, or introduce some sort of escalation, where the knights have to one-up each other to keep the glory awards high. After all, roast suckling pig isn't so fancy after Troit Piglet ala Almondine. Overall the feast book has been a lot of fun for the group, and very helpful to GMing. Since I started the campaign very early (410AD), a lot of the typical sources for adventures (tournaments, chivalry, romance) aren't available yet, and feast help me to work up adventures during the "good years" when everything is going well, and there isn't much for knights to do.

Good. As it stands now it's fun, and thats good, but it is also a cheap way to get an extra hundred glory, so it liable to exploitation. Okay, that helps a lot. I really haven't had any problems with things , yet (except for tied geniality scores), but now that my PKs are started to get landed they will want to find ways to spend their libra. It can be much more than that. If the PKs take turns holding one feast a year, and everybody who make it "Above the Salt" gets the extra 100 Glory, then multiple knights could get it every year. That can be rather autmatic if the PKs have high glory and are selctive about the guest lists. It is, just this one turned out to be more stressful on the GM than on the player! This feast came about because one PK finally manage to marry the widow he's been after, and his wife thought it would be a good idea to hold a small feast, where he could meet some of his neighboring knights, and also introduce them to the members of his order (the other PKs). Se though this could help both her husband and his friends politically. So a small, but fine feast for roughly 20 knights and wives. The PK, however, who is known for throwing rather large bashes in real life, decided to expand the guest list to include the Earl (about another 50 guests including retinue), the Archbishop of London (who the PK is on good terms with. He even performed the PK's wedding ceremony, at St. Paul's), the Archbishop of Salisbury (doesn't want to snub the local archbishop), and practically everybody else he's rubbed elbows with over the last decade whose name he remembers. So now we got over 100 attendees (and probably growing). Some of the more interesting bits: The PK kinda inherited the squire of his wife's deceased husband, whose been helping around the estate since his lord died ten years ago. The PK finally decided to knight him, and maintain him as a household knight and has turned the feast into a knighting feast. The Earl is okay with this because it is both early in the campaign, when knights can knight others, and because the PK is known for his loyalty, so the Earl essentially gets a "free" knight out of this. The PK wanted to seat the fellow members of his Order (The Knights of the Griffon) "above the Salt" but his wife told him that would wreak havoc with the seating arrangement, and his GM told him it would mean an Arbitrary check. One of the reason why the wife planned for the PKs Order is that she knew if she didn't invite them,he would, and so she plans of sending them off hunting the week before the feast in the hopes that they can bag something exotic to spice things up. At the very least it will make all those Red Deer encounters pay off ("More venison, m'lord?").

Ah. The way it works in Book of Feasts is that characters gain geniality based upon their seating, actions, and event cards played during the feat. At the end of the feast the one with the highest geniality is considered the most entertaining guest and "wins" the feast, getting ten times his gentility in glory. Everyone else just gets their gentility. Those who sit "Above the Salt" (at or near the high table)can't play event cards (too great a risk of making a fool of themselves) but are awarded an extra 100 Glory. And they add an extra 100 Glory if the fest is a Royal one. Some other Glory awards are possible through he event cards but these are modest amounts or rare occurrences and so aren't a problem. What appears to be a problem is that the glory awards from a feast are the same regardless of the size, splendor, or cost of the feast. I think grander, lager feast should be more glorious than smaller, more common affiars. I also am concerned about PKs taking turns holding feasts so they can all grab an extra 100 Glory or so, on a regular basis. Now seating in BoF is determined by an APP roll, but there are all sorts of social consequences for the character and the host if someone is seating beneath someone of lower station or glory. What I was thinking of was: Factor Station and Glory into the Seating arrangements. Either by using the +1 per 1000 Glory, or +1 per Glory Band (i.e. +1 at 1K, +2 at 2K, +3 at 4K, +4 at 8K, etc). Adjust the multiplier to glory for "winning" the feast, and the award for sitting "Above the Salt" based on the size and splendor of the feast. So a small feast with ordinary fare might only be x2 and 20 Glory instead of x10 and 100.

Yeah. I think what happens is that Book of Feasts gives out glory for the feast to make the process interesting and worthwhile, compared to adventuring. I don't mind the Royal feast so much, as it would be a lot less common. I'm working on a sliding scale to replace the x10 multiplier and the 100 Glory for the High Table. Oh, while I'm nitpicking, I think the seating arrangement is all wrong. By the Book of Feast seating is done according to APP, which is nice in that it makes APP useful, instead of the dump stat that is has been. But everything else in the book stresses that seating is according to rank and prestige (glory). So a Glory modifier to APP would make a lot of sense.

Traditionally, and that might not apply in RQG, a character could use a bound spirit's magic points to power his spells, or it's INT (now CHA apparently) to store spells. However for s spirit to cast a spell itself, or initiate spirit combat it had to be released. Allied Spirits (and familiars) were an exception, as they were not bound by their masters, but were with them of their own volition.

I remember, but you have to consider that each vassal knight has £1 in discretionary funds every year, and with a luck from adventuring could run a feast every year. In fact most knights actually go to several feasts every year. I doubt the people of station in the land who do regularly sit "above the Salt" are netting an extra 500 glory a year for the various feasts. Both are interesting roleplaying challenges but hardly anything that is going to come up each feast, or justify the 100 glory. Uh, no. The table is considered the "high table" because of the status of the people at it, not because it is raised. The host does indeed sit at the high table, and he various clues on the cards promote that. Also, even if the other PKs are of equal status and wind up "above the salt" they just get the benefit too. There is nothing in the book of the feast that states that "above the salt" doesn't apply to small, local feats, such as ones following a knighting ceremony. At least nothing that I could find. But honestly, I think the Glory awards for feats should probably be scaled to match the size, grandeur and duration of the feast. There is precedent for that with the extra hundred glory for a regal feast. I think I do up an optional table that modifies glory rewards according to size and grandeur. A small, ordinary feast shouldn't be as glorious as a large grand one. Page 12, second paragraph under THE END OF THE FEAST

No it wasn't. Ancient warriors moved faster than 24m/round (7.2kph/4.5mph). While they did use shields and shield bearers for protection, it wasn't because of their move rate. Now we can all talk about armor, hustling on the battlefield, etc. but the reality is, people and animals should move faster than they do in RQG. Speaking of animals, look at calvary. Assuming a 12 Move (per the latest BRP) then horses would be moving at 36m/round (10.8kph/6.7mph). I can run faster than 7mph on two legs.

And even then the real limit was in the availability of suitable devices to bind spirits into. In RQ2 and RQG storage crystals are fairly common. In RQ3 magicians mostly have to create their own binding objects, make the enchantment rolls, and sacrifice POW to do so.

Yes but you usisally don't get so much glory for so little expenditure. Indeed he is. He is holding a fine feast and is inviting every VIP he knows. He just got landed and wants to show off. It just seems to be a cheap way to buy glory. The PK is giving a fine feast (4d/person,) and spending £ 2. aI don't want the PKs to be buying glory at 50 per £ 1. Maybe the 100 glory award should be scaled to match the size and grandeur of the feast? A small feast with modest fare might only be worth 10 or 20 Glory? Something along the lines of cost per person times duration times a size factor?

But it didn't. There was no universal 4 point cap. In RQ2 the cap was per spell.

I prefer something fairly similar. A character can move X and attack, or 2X and not. Maybe 3X with a running roll. But my displease with the new move rates isn't with the method, but with the rate. 24m per round for a running person is very slow, and give missile troops much more time to pepper opponents with arrows.

Yup, but that also means more Magic Points and more CHA to "know" it, or more bound spirits, crystals or matrices. Now I haven't run or played RQG, but I have done so with RQ2 and RQ3 and several related RPGs, and based on that, by the time the PCs can start to assemble the resources required to make Bladesharp 10 plus kickers practical, capping the spells just means that they allocate those resources towards something else. Plus with the drain on MPs for such a powerful setup (plus Countermagic) most of the PCs didn't want to cast a spell that high, because of the relatively short duration, and because it would take a long time to replenish the magic points, often leaving them vulnerable. The "ten" was held in reserve for dire situations.

One of my PKs is going to host a feast. Since he is the host he will naturally sit at the Host's table, "Above the Salt". Does he get the extra 100 glory for that? To me it seems like it isn't that big a deal to sit at the high table when your the host.

I started with RQ2 as well, but: 1. RQ3 changed that and it's been changed for over 35 years. 2. A bunch of spells in RQ2 had a 6 point cap (Protection. Heal) yet you failed to mention that. 3. We'rent you the guy who was surprised that spells weren't capped in RQG. I counter with why make them fixed in cost and effect?

Yes, but how many bound sprirts know Bladesharp 10? Maybe, but wouldn't the spirit need high enough stats to hold the spell? So it sounds like the campaign is already getting very high powered if the players have the capability to pull that off. Frankly I don't see Bladesharp 10 being much better than say, Bladesharp 5 and Protection 5. I'd be more concerned about something like Multimissle 10, but even then it's probably overkill.

I actually did just that waaaay back in RQ3. A character who was going to face a dragon went on a quest to get a powerful sword that had a Bladesharp 10 matrix. He retrieved the sword, faced the dragon, activated the spell, and proceeded to bounce off the dragon's 25 point scales.The look on the player's face was priceless. He eventually scored a critical and disabled the thing, although it stayed up for awhile, making CON rolls, and knocking said PC about like a pinball. The only reason why the player survived was because he was both heavily armored and made all his parries, and he still lost an arm in the process.

But I think the original reason for the cap was that the authors were unsure as to how overpowering the game would be without a cap. I think the removal of the cap was because it turned out to be unnecessary. In RQ3, few characters wanted to allocate so much INT to memorizing a 10 point spell, and "forgetting" the spell to make room worked differently in that the spell was lost, not just shifted out of ready memory. Plus finding a sprirt with such a powerful spell and beating in in spirit combat had it's own challenges. Is there so much spell storage in RQG that a character can afford to allocate 10 points to memorize it? I mean, even with an 18 CHA (they use CHA instead of INT now, right?) that only leaves 8 points free for other spells, and a character would probably want to have Protection, some Healing, a POW vs POW type spell such as Disrupt to get POW gain rolls, plus maybe one or two other useful spells like Light, Speedart, Mobilty, or Repair on hand. Then again the over 100% reducing the opposing parry rule didn't exist in RQ3, so Bladesharp is more useful in RQG if it gets a weapon attack over 100%.

As fast as I run without armor-just not for as long. And I'd bet I could run even faster if people were shooting arrows at me. The 24m/round is excluseto RQG, too. Characters in RQ2, RQ3 and BRP are faster.

Yes, but the problem is that the 24m/RQG round is the running speed! The RQG walking speed is only 8m/RQG round, or about 2.4kph or 1.5 mph. Hence why I keep saying it is too slow.