Hzark10

Agreed.

Two things I wanted to bring to the table. The first was the tribes hindered the unity of England. The Romans, Vortigern, Hengest, and others were able to capitalize on this. So, the tribal structure was brought in, which slowly evolved into the county structure. So, a little bit of history was necessary. Second, the migrations that occurred during Vortigern's reign did two things: it brought a unity amongst the various peoples as they had one thing in common at least. Aurelius used this to build his invasion army. More importantly, he held the army together throughout the 3 year span in dealing with Vortigern, further uniting the various people. Both aspects were somewhat new to Greg, but he actually like how it was all put together. This has always intrigued me and would like to see this portion expanded upon. During the anarchy and perhaps in Cambria or the far north, a campaign could be set which would see this as the major theme.

Please check out "Britannia, the Failed State," by Stuart Laycock. Greg sent it to me during my writing the history and development of Book of Sires. He was wondering if I should just drop the tribe as coinage distributions did not show any coinage directly to them, rather to the Atrebates and Dobunnis. But, as Greg was oft to say, YPMV. I am not trying to start an argument. I was just giving my two denarii on this.

What I think everyone tends to forget is Greg grew with each edition of the game as he did more and more research. For example, the Belgae tribe has historically been the tribe of Salisbury. Yet. as Greg delved deeper into history, and more recent archaeological evidence came forth, he felt the Belgae disappeared as a tribe much earlier. Book of Sires tried to take that into account. So, likewise, at one point, Greg felt there was a distinction between Count and Earl and wanted Roderick to be a bit different, so he made him so, and decided to keep it that way. Me? I am perfectly fine with it being in the game, and although one can argue, there is no real distinction, I rule that there is one.

maybe I am missing something, but the link does not take me to a review and when I type in the search bar, I do not find the article as shown above. Help, anyone?

Depending on your Pendragon (YPMV), being a Banneret means you did SOMETHING on the battlefield that was NOTICED and the King rewarded that knight. As far as Estate holders, please think upon what the estate means. Holding from a/the KING. And a king trumps the lesser nobility. True, you might be true to Earl Rodderick, but an Earl is not a King. A Baron has lands totaling at least 100. So, a Baron could, in essence, give someone an estate, but in doing so lessens his own. And, how many Barons would be willing to do that? For what price?

I have been impressed with the quality of artwork for both Call of Cthulhu and Runequest. A book of artwork for Pendragon would be awesome.

I played a Pagan Grail/Cauldron Knight during one of my campaigns as a player. The gm was trying out some new things and it seemed to work relatively well, but things got political and so it kinda faded into the background before it reached a climax.

That's true, and thanks for the clarification.

You have hit the nail on the head. BUT there is a difference between passing a test, and being forced to make a test. Some scenarios require a certain trait to successfully be passed in order to continue. If you have a trait of 16 or above, you are FORCED to take the test, while someone who has 15 or less has a choice in the matter. In the regard of fighting a giant, or some other creature you would prefer not to fight, if you are notable, you must fail in order not to fight. Whereas if you are not notable, you can choose not to fight. And, as you said, in some sceanarios, someone must succeed in order to continue.

Regarding SIZ, many of us gamemasters play with the rule that after 21, SIZ does not mean height, but rather, girth. So, increasing that stat means getting fat, and if continuing, obese. People do not keep growing throughout their lives.

Laughter at the person, mentionings of how ridiculous he/she looks, exaggerated movements, mimicking the person in question, the local bard/minstrel lampooning them are all good results.

Here is the info I was referring to: Greg's old website: http://www.gspendragon.com/essays.html Under Grail Christianity, you will find a link to an essay Greg approved for Grail Christianity. He also incorporates an addition and that is the Love (Grail) Passion. Make sure you also read this. This is approved for KAP 5.2

There is precedence for this idea: you may only use each passion once per battle. And many would consider the APP contests to be battles.

to be honest, because coins are one item I don't always have, I used dice. Simply go odd-even and you have the same idea.

I don't have my notes in front of me, but Grail Christianity is NOT British Christianity. They have different requirements and benefits. Maybe someone else can enlighten us? Otherwise, will have to wait until I find my notes on this.

You got it.

Believe it or not, I agree with both Cornelius and Atgxtg. You cannot use one inspiration roll and then use the target of that inspiration to inspire something else. One or the other. I do allow inspiraiton to affect traits and attributes, depending on the situation, but have on occasion used just a trait. It is rare, and when I ruled it as such, the players understood and accepted it without complaint. Of course, my game is a little higher powered than some.

I done it both ways, now that I understand your gist. In the first case, yes, it is usually a successful Passion that gets you to be inspired in a Trait, or attribute. However, I have used a trait itself when that PK had a ultimate value to remain true to his vow of chastity (he made it when it was not required by the church or another person).

And wouldn't that make a wonderful scenario for your PKs, to try to get the real princes out before the usurper manages to kill them off. Enough of real history survives that make scenarios fun to create. But, that is only if you are playing in a campaign that far back. If not, then it is just fun to know what portion your ancestor did or did not do.

Spoilsport.... ;) And yes, the idea that no one has the complete picture is on purpose. You missed at least one of the plot twists, but I am glad you like what you found so far. And timing is everything as you continue to find out.

Didn't forget it, but didn't mention it either. Thank you for doing so. True, Joe of A did bring it with him. My emphasis was, this has been around for centuries. Yet, is not listed as a religion for PKs. BC is, at least during the time of 480-510 and dies a true death sometime early in the 500s, so can be removed as a choice by 530.

Yes. I will, under proper instances as Atgxtg mentions, that Traits also can be used to inspire yourself. A notably chaste knight, without any love for anyone to counter with, can try to withstand advances solely based on his chaste score. I usually tie it into roleplaying as well. If it brings me into YPMV, so be it, but my players did not object and felt it was both reasonable and faithful to the stories.

Exactly, and my point was what you correctly stated: So, think about the various editions of KAP. KAP4 assumes a start date of 531. Boy King supplement backed it up to 510. KAP 5 (and 5.1, 5.2) moves it back to 485. The Great Pendragon Campaign starts in 485 (and its supplement "Book of Uther" moves it to 480). The Pelagian Heresy came about and reached its height about this time. Book of Sires specifically mentions that in 403 Victricius, the Bishop of Rouen, visits Britain to bring peace to the island's clergy. In 418, Pelagiusm the theologian of British Christianity, is declared a heretic. In 447, St. Germanus returns to Britain to condemn and combat British Christianity. With the situation with Vortigern and the Saxons during this time, we can assume there is much more going on than stamping out this sect. So, British Christianity is still vibrant in 480. However, by 530, one can argue it has been stomped out and can be removed as a choice of religions. Or not, as you would prefer. The addition of Grail Christianity may also be problematical as it traces its roots back to Joseph and he came over way earlier. So when did Grail Christianity start?

Keep us posted on how using APP and inspiration works. Since I allow traits and passions as the source of inspiration, I am interested in determining whether Attributes can also be used as one.