Hzark10

Again, peer pressure as someone else is running your wife should help reinforce this. That being said, what you have does have merit. Being the mother of a famous son should have some glory gain, as does whath your husband does. I think the wife should get some of her husband's continuing glory. Also, she should get glory for notable passions and traits, just as a knight does. She does have some dynastic qualities built in. Her husband, being a knight, does not have a risk-free occupation and she may find herself without one at any point. She will have her portion, her sons and daughters to look after, and so on. It is just a different game. Once tournaments and the like get going, she also has a min-game built in, but that depends on the other players and gamemaster as to whether this will become part of the normal game or not.

In the short run, that might be the case, but if/when this player gets a wife/husband, then they will be at the mercy of another as well. If that player did something that totally hoses someone (something the gm should have stopped), then he can't cry if it happens to him. And if it happens more than once, the other players should stop playing with this player.

Morien, good analysis. I don't think this is, by nature, bad. A paragraph or two in the book would go a long way to explain this towards those who don't see it. And the gm should take the time to explain these differences. Going back to the idea of 4 generic types of knights (Joe Average, Master of the Hunt, The Fighter, The Courtier), one can see the differences in attributes and skills. Knowing beforehand that the gm is running a campaign from 480-518, courtly skills are not as important as combat skills. Still, one can take the Courtier, but may indeed suffer from it. That is a player's choice, as long as he knows beforehand.

I would caution you on this. Wives seldom do everything a husband wants, in the way they want. Greg always preferred another player be the wife so they would not always be 100% in sync. Likewise, squires. Sounds like a wonderful tool. The one attribute KAP does not track is Intelligence, but for NPCs, I could see the advantage of having one.

Everyone must remember, that these feasts were one chance that ladies and especially maidens had a chance to interact with those who could be paired with them through marriages. Some marriages are arranged, but for others, this was the once chance to make impressions. There was no dating per se, no time to discuss things on the internet, or phone, etc. Young men also play the game as it is a chance to reach higher up and try to impress those who would not normally consider him.

"You're Welcome!" sung to a certain song...

The Picts had a culture. Originally, they were in Book of Sires, but I dropped them relatively early as the size of the book would have been even larger than it presently is. Your point about Book of Courts, Tournaments, and Festivals has merit. Heck, a book that describes more in detail about everyday life would be a good asset to those who are running a campaign based on your County. Yup, that would be also a good point. Women could compete as to who had the greatest harvest, largest bull, herd, greatest raid, etc.

I'm thinking a bit more on cultures would be welcome. Weddings might be, however Festivals in general would be awesome. More chances to show generosity, plot hooks, stuff that would make campaigns more vibrant. Of course, the more we thrown in, the slower a campaign would go. But, a satisfactory campaign of say, 20 years, would be great. If it continues, even more so. But a successful campaign that a gm can hang his/her hat on is very satisfying.

30 would seem to be a good goal

Simple and easy to calculate. I like it.

I like, I like. It lets roleplaying come forth more and looks for creative uses of skills/attributes/traits.

Oh, I could see that as well, but that might come into play a bit later. My thinking is she would be distracting even without the Lustful kicking in immediately.

Thanks for the head tap. I haven't looked at my 1st edition in a few years and forgot that. Agree. Also be a good use of misdirection. I mean, it might be very easy to have someone sneak by when looking at a very lovely face...

I glad there is an upper cap. Makes those who are truly beautiful have to depend less on trinkets while those who are a bit lower can improve themselves.

Great work. I've seen good work on horses, drinks, armor, fashions, and weapons. What else would be good to include in a "life and times in King Arthur" type supplement?

So, the uses of APP would be: 1) bonus/penalty to courtly skills 2) above 15, addition to Glory, below 6 would yield a penalty? 3) Inspiration use? I agree it would help women more, but every legend I know of says Lancelot was pretty high in this stat as well.

The main reason KAP doesn't have APP being more important, IMHO, is the perception that many don't think it is all that important. Back to the dragon situation for a moment, it is the quest to slay the dragon that most think of, not because of the APP of the princess. Helena of Troy launched 1000 ships because of her beauty, or so it is told. Perhaps if more speak up about APP becoming more important, then a more critical look at this subject will entail. So far, most of KAP, in all editions, deal more with Glory and Combat and the earlier years of Arthur and pre-Arthur. In the latter periods of the game, questing and court scenes are much more important and I feel APP would have a great impact.

That would be an interesting twist. What would you suggest to create such a thing in the rules?

I would think that if he/she succeeds in a Love check, then it would be a sincere conversion however. Overall, I would want to see it acted out through RPing and decide then.

Granted. But, the gm then needs to make sure the mutual supporting actions furthers the campaign's goals and not get out of hand. Tying it into Geniality at feasts would be cool, but that requires purchase of the same. Not everyone will have it, so optional usage rules need to be included.

As Morien pointed out, but if you get a Passion to 16+, then you may have to invoke it. I always allow a PK to override their character, but at the cost of a point of that passion or trait immediately.

These could be made more generic to be placed on a card. For example, roll for #####. If successful, gains bonus to one of PK's goals while agreeing that the PK will support NPC Sir/Dame in their goal. The idea is the PK gets a bonus, but in return, must support a NPC character in reaching his or her goal as well. That way, the gm can further plots down the road.

Looks nice. Suggestion: Put at least one blank line on the skill section to take into account Family Characteristic or personal choices.

This is my preferred method, both for wives and squires. You do not get to be both the PK and an associated character, whether squire or wife. BUT, another player's is perfectly ok. Greg also mentioned he would prefer this.

So, maybe one of these daughters could take up her father's plight and become a knight.