Jump to content

Morien

Regulars
  • Content Count

    1,168
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Morien last won the day on July 31 2019

Morien had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

319 Excellent

About Morien

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    1989 D&D, the original one.
    1990s Other RPGs to follow.
    1995 GURPS. Lots of GURPS.
    2000 Pendragon. Lots of Pendragon.
    2010-ish Becoming active in Nocturnal's Pendragon Forum.
    2014 Starting to help out with the publications & erratas as part of Greg's 'Household Knights'.
  • Current games
    GMing one GPC Pendragon Campaign, and another campaign in Middle-earth using Pendragon system.
    Playing in a couple of GURPS campaign.
  • Location
    Barcelona, for now
  • Blurb
    To be honest, I chose my username based on an old RPG character of mine, not because of its Arthurian connection. I am a pasty-white Finn, actually. :P

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Alright, back to the previously scheduled programming... Leafing through the Book of Sires, it becomes clear that if Sword is allowed to solve both Battles and Raids/Garrisons, then it swiftly becomes the most rolled skill and the one that gains most Glory. Which is kinda how the normal campaign often goes as well, admittedly. However, the other option would be to split the two so that Sword governs Battles, and Horsemanship governs Raids/Garrisons, where you are usually either riding away from the defenders or trying to chase down bandits and raiders. That is my handwavey explanation at
  2. There are some possible mitigating factors / fixes... 1.) The Father could be born earlier without problems and thus have more time to marry and have the PK. There is also some +-year or so when it comes to the ages of the starting PKs easily enough. 2.) You could simply mandate that if the Grandfather or the Father has not married and/or produced the heir by the cutoff time (at the age of 25, say, to use the default from BoSi), then they will marry a less Glorious wife (half the Glory or something) and/or has a son anyway. This ensures that even the low Flirting characters will even
  3. One thing to recall, as you yourself pointed out, Voord 99, is that the accelerated social and technological change has been part of KAP since pretty much the beginning. You get the fashions and technology changing at about 20 game-years to a historical century, to telescope Arthur's reign from about 1200 to late 1400s or so. That being said, I did say that Constantin would introduce/codify the feudalism. In short, what I was imagining was what Greg said about the Counts in Book of the Warlord: "Long ago, Emperor Constantine created the office, and appointed individuals to be responsible
  4. As it happens, Salisbury is a special case, as the Count of Salisbury has ruled it since at least pre-Constantin times (since Emperor Constantine, if you take Warlord at face value). So any loyalty they feel is to the Count already, making the feudalism thing a very easy adjustment for them. That being said, I agree with you that it would have worked much easier (and be more believable) if Feudalism were introduced/codified already by Constantin, to reward his trusted men. This would have given us a generation (the Great-Grandfather) who was already feudal, and his son (the Grandfather) w
  5. Actually, I may have misunderstood. If the Glorious Death and the normal Death chances are the same, then it works great for skills 10-19: a critical and a fumble are equally unlikely. Granted, I was summing up the great heroism with glorious death and leaving that choice for the players. But I am fine with that. Limitations of the 1d20 system and all that. There is also a point that if we are 'playing' the ancestors, a generally lower death chance (since many people would choose heroics rather than Glorious death, at least around the beginning of the career, lowering the death chance from 5%+
  6. Forgot to address this... Yes, some rare events might take some thinking. Gorlois is actually easy: it is clearly a critical Courtesy roll. 🙂
  7. 3. Not too bothered by the death chance being low. But one way to model that would be to have a death chance alto on a failure. Like if the death is supposed to happen 20% of the time, roll Sword-5 and if it is a failure, roll again and die on a failure. This is details, tweaks to particular battles. 6. It gives Flirting a role past the courting. Otherwise it pretty much becomes useless as soon as you marry and pretty weak even before it. Now it is definitely one you want to raise to 10 if not 15 asap. 7. Very valid criticism. I think I would lower the squire trainings to 3 or 4. An
  8. Thinking a bit more of the CON roll etc... 1. Roll CON. Critical: Skip next year's CON roll. Success: no effect. Failure: Roll CON again; on another failure, -1 CON due to an illness. Fumble: Died of Illness (or, since this is a rather ignoble end for a knight, perhaps just seriously ill this year, -3 CON and missed the events). 3. Fighting and CON: Roll CON, with +5/-5 if you succeeded/failed Sword. On a failure, you suffered a Major Wound, -1 CON. That might sound punitive, but I don't think it would happen all that often until the Aging starts to take hold. Most characters wo
  9. Hi all. The Forum has been a bit quiet lately, so I figured I'd go ahead and start a new thread to get some conversations going. The review of Book of Sires by Dan Wells ( link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vqUTKkqCEk&lc=UgwE008885c5-xMz08h4AaABAg.9IdCgf7aIxz9IfQS3ug49p ) rekindled my enthusiasm to talk about Book of Sires again. (His channel has other KAP reviews as well: KAP 5.2, Great Pendragon Campaign, Book of Uther and Book of Feasts. And also other RPGs. If you are interested in such things, you could do worse than take a look and drop him a Like. Can't hurt to increase the
  10. You'd normally use your manor (landholding) as 'of X', but as you go farther afield, you might use 'of Salisbury' or even 'of Logres'. Kinda like if you are in your state in US, you might say, "Oh, I am from Covington." when meeting a fellow Louisianian, "I am from New Orleans" or "I am from Louisiana" when talking to someone out of state, and "I am from the USA." when travelling in Europe. But as surnames go, yes, go with your landholding, i.e. your ancestral manor (for instance, Mowbray comes from Montbray, 'mud hill', in Normandy). That being said, many family names form from patronym
  11. Given that the PKs are vassal knights, I suspect they would be familiar with wardship and what it entails, more so than the players themselves. Fosterage is kinda what we are looking at here, and it would be very much in line of what the PKs themselves went through. It would be quite normal for the noble children to spend some time as a page in the court of their liege lord or some other allied/friendly higher noble, prior to becoming a squire. If this is around 503 or so, Robert would be turning 11. He is certainly old enough to become a page (although one of such rank would probably be
  12. My Lions (and most other predators and evil-tempered beasts, like boars) tend to attack back after the first round, and even that first round they get to try to evade. But I do want the hunts of such beasts to feel dangerous. Also, if the beast has doubled back (obstacle 20), then it is there to ambush the hunters, not to get surprised itself!
  13. Pretty much what Voord 99 already said. In our campaign, Jenna was married off to the new Praetor of Levcomagus (an ambitious Vassal Knight who ensured Ulfius' safety in the aftermath of the Infamous Feast, and a personal enemy of the PKs; I killed Blains off in the Infamous Feast, since he hadn't really had dealings with the PKs in person) in order to get his alliance against Syagrius, who had kidnapped Ygraine and tried to conquer Salisbury with a mercenary army funded by the royal treasury he had seized (canonically Llud's Hall, but I moved it to Devizes since we had a PK manor there,
×
×
  • Create New...