Khanwulf

Can we spend some days discussing the GPC implications of the Cat killing Arthur and going on to rule Britain? (Per the satirical French story referenced.)

I kid.

Mostly.

--Khanwulf

The knight is assigned to serve as Arthur's almoner for a period of time. Per Book of Uther that is usually a cleric's job (the normal one can act as a mentor for the knight, instructing him on discerning generosity), with a key trait of Spiritual, automatic check to Generous and opportunity roll to Religion.

That'll teach 'im!

--Khanwulf

If you *do* need to humanize the Angles, keep in mind that Duke Lindsey keeps a tribe of "pet Angles" to the east and uses them in his military. They are essentially a variation of the Berroc Saxons.

Note as well that the Angles didn't join Hengest's little march north in 469. That helps distinguish them from the Saxons (and Jutes) who make up most of Octa and Eossa's horde. 

But as Morien points out, you don't send someone with a famous Hate to negotiate with his enemies without trying to manage that first. If the PK's lord wants the mission to succeed (and there could always be the twist that he doesn't), then either removing the PK to other duties or working to disarm his ceaseless rage are reasonable steps.

--Khanwulf 

19 hours ago, JonL said:

It's been years since I ran the math, and the annual passive Glory rules may have changed since then, but at least at the time I crunched it out,  a sufficiently pious and chivalrous knight with many notable traits, significant titles and estates, etc, who upon reaching middle age starts putting Glory boosts into his lowest stat at every opportunity could, with a bit of luck, stretch out his gradual decline into decrepitude over an implausibly loooooooong span. 

Duke Eldol is over there, smirking.

Also, you could have a half-fae character or one who's spent some time in Faerie.

1 hour ago, mandrill_one said:

Maybe what Atgxtg says could be formalized by framing it within the well-known partition of Medieval society into three "orders": those who pray, those who work, those who fight. For KAP, the 3 orders become 4, with the addition of (the very rare) "those who enchant" ("those who charm"?).
It does not become one order to actively perform the duties that are typical of another order.
So, it does not become a knight to actively produce magic effects, or to celebrate Mass; however, he can certainly attend Mass, or use magic items or benefit from magical effects created by other people.

You don't even need to go that far: the praying class was expected to be lettered, and the ability to read and write and enjoy "secret" knowledge passed through books by ancient people meant that you were assigned sorcerous powers thereby. It's a reason why Morgan is known as an enchantress: she (of the fighting class, albeit female) spent a lot of time in a convent being taught to read and write and study. Thus: magic!

So. It seems the consensus is that a knight who acquires magic items and/or abilities may use them freely in accordance with all knightly virtues without denting his honor. After all, God and his early lords have ordained to provide such tools that their order may be maintained to the benefit of the lower classes (and, of course, the nobles).

But learning how to force one's will on the world through arcane means is right out.

I'd suppose a magical ability that *looks* like a spell, being used in a dishonorable fashion, might increase the honor hit of that action. Maybe.

--Khanwulf 

This... this has probably been answered before, but let's discuss.

Arthurian legend has a variety of "magic knights"... and then it has magic-using knights. The latter group of sorcerous lancers include the mysterious Menw, who shows up in Culhwch and Olwen to raise a fog at one point. The latter group explicitly includes Gawain, and may include Kay, Bedivere and the like if you hew to Culhwch.

It's the express inclusion of Gawain that bothers me a tad. Greg set Culhwch to one side because despite its authenticity as one of the earliest legends of Arthur's court, it doesn't fit with the chivalric practice of KAP.

Gawain has magic powers that raise his strength in the morning such that he's mightiest at noon and weakens toward dusk. 

Now... in KAP's honor loss tables there is '-8 for casting spells' (single quotes because I'm not actually looking at it right now). We can assume that Menw took this hit, and then rolled forward raising Honor at ever opportunity. But what about Gawain? If you acquire a magic power--a secret in Gawain's case known to himself, Arthur and select few others I might add--what kind of Honor hit do you take?

Are 'spells' limited to KAP-style magic with life energy and all that? Or is it a broader category of magic in general?

Bonus: how did Gawain get his solar superman power? Any explanation?

--Khanwulf

(PS: obviously in Gawain's case he probably earned his Honor back in an afternoon or something--at least by Greg's notes!)

7 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

 

It might be worth noting that in Celtic Myths the Formorian Leader Balor lived on an island of glass . It also wouldn't be too much of a stretch for the ancient people to have discovered how to make Pykrete- it's a very low tech recipe, if you wanted a less magical/mystical explanation. That could let you run a lost continent sotry when the ice island melts into the oceans. 

 

The Formorians were also inveterate sea raiders. They could easily have--in that same breath--based from a variety of icebergs in the Hyperborean days of Irish myth.

But the imagery of an ice-castle carved with Formorian heat rays (see: Balor's eye) melting into the sea as knights run off with its mystic gem (or... cauldron?) is precious.

--Khanwulf

15 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Generally you have to defeat the foe, and then have a squire free who can take the prisoner from the field of battle back to your lines. Unless of course you want to do it yourself. 

That would limit the number of prisoners since a knight would either run out of squires, or he would miss a round or so getting to and from the battle.

There's your reason to have 2+ squires, if you can afford it.

22 hours ago, jeffjerwin said:

It isn't actually clear that the fortresses mentioned in Preiddeu Annwn are the same fortress or whether they are different stops on an Otherworldly journey, which I thin is quite possible: there are fragmentary references in Welsh sources (as well as John Dee!) to an Arthurian expedition to Iceland and Greenland. Caer Wydr is usually on an island, but may be distinct from Ynys Wydryn and so forth: we simply don't know. It does resemble in certain ways the 'tower' or 'pillar of glass' encountered in various Imrama stories and in the Partholon story, which suggest possibly an iceberg.

In Welsh, 'siddi' can mean 'turning', but here it's thought to be an Irish loan-word. A 'turning castle' appears as Curoi's fortress in Irish myth, and that legend, in any rate, is probably not contaminated significantly with romance influence. There is also a turning castle in Perlesvaus, and if I recall correctly, in Artus de Petit-Bretagne.

An interesting observation that hadn't occurred to me before, and will be filed away. The Arthurian expedition to the uttermost north (Iceland and Greenland) is fascinating, as it was drawn on to promote English supremacy and claim over these lands. (Along with Scandinavia I might add.)

The fascinating bit is that you could get the effect of a ring of islands around the north pole, if the pole mentioned is magnetic and it was located under what is now Greenland--a Greenland absent its ice cap! Scientists suspect the magnetic pole was at one point located under Greenland, so such an echo seems hauntingly similar to the Peri Reis Map of Antarctica free of ice.  

The "castle of glass" as an iceberg is a very intriguing take as well. Why not?

--Khanwulf

Ok, so yes, it generally has been assumed to be actually turning. Though I still am concerned that there has been a misunderstanding of the origin of the turning maze as it was brought into the ballads.

French is not at my command, sadly. Caer Sidi itself is conflated with the Castle of Glass of legends as well--always on an island, and thus separated from the mortal world by the sea.

--Khanwulf 

So, I stumbled across "The Historic King Arthur: Authenticating the Celtic Hero of Post-Roman Britain" (Frank D. Reno) again. And read the bits on fitting the timeline together, again. Interesting stuff. 

At any rate, we know Greg stretched the timing of the GPC such that you could run one adventure a year and it would more or less line up with several touchpoints. I'm curious where that timeline could be best telescoped in order to fit something more on the order the above book, with the key dates being:

440 - Hengest's landing (second advent of Saxons)

453 - Aelle's landing (third advent of Saxons)

495 or 497 - Cerdic the West Saxon King landing

497 - Badon

518 - Camlann, between Saxons and Arthur primarily

I'm not sure that I'll even attempt to use such compression (which would create a dark ages Arthur overlapping with Ambrosius for sure), but this is what the book suggests.

--Khanwulf

On the Turning Castle... do you tend to represent that as an actual, rotating castle? Or one that uses or sits within the Celtic seven-turning maze motif?

Just curious.

The Dyke has been found to be at least begun after Roman times started, based on finding Roman nails in the lowest substrata.

It does seem like a good idea to just call it refurbished by Ambrosius and try to avoid making a big deal of it. The next major utilization might be as Sussex's border.

--Khanwulf

16 hours ago, Uqbarian said:

KAP 5.2 says Ambrosius "built these massive earthworks as a part of a defense system against the Saxons to the east."

The Dike appears to have been renamed Renn's Dyke in BoW and BoU. Maybe Stafford did have a new origin in mind?

Yeah if Greg moved the naming in later books that's fine. The only plausible reason I can think of Ambrosius to build the thing (or even to enlarge/complete/refurbish it) is because of the Saxons coming up the Thames Valley.

I'd be OK with the Dike being intact, USED by Ambrosius as a stopgap, and then colloquially known as "his" thereafter, even as other chroniclers call it "Renn's Dike" for reasons.

The reading I've been able to do indicate that this is not the only dyke in southern England, and some of them face east-west. It's just the largest linear fortification. There is some acknowledgement that the post-Roman Britons DID build it, but also note that the Saxons seem to have adopted linear fortifications as well as a means of warding their territory from irate Celts.

Aside from some bombshell of unpublished observations, this is probably solid YPMV territory.

--Khanwulf 

Good gentles, forgive me if this has been covered at depth before.

Let's talk about "Ambrosius' Dike". This fortification across the north of Salisbury (and beyond) doesn't seem to have much explanation for its naming, and as the timeline has moved backwards into SIRES, the connection between it and Aurelius Ambrosius is more salient to the story.

First, we're talking about the Wansdyke, which runs from eastern Silchester all the way past (south of) Bath and to the sea. It's an impressive engineering feat that incorporates Roman roads at some points (road atop the wall). Here's a map:

The dashed line here is the Thames River, while the solid line is the Dyke--in some places > 14 feet high in modern times with a ditch 8+ feet deep on the north side, so we can assume the whole thing was intended to be at least three times the height of a man. 

There are indications from archaeology that the Wansdyke (Woden's Dyke) dates back to Roman times (as if the road wasn't enough of a clue), but what I'm looking for is more input on why Greg slapped Ambrosius' name on it. Did he intend for Ambrosius to have contributed to its construction? Did the High King go for a ride one day and nod approvingly at the wall, saying "nice dike!" and the Count gave it to him? Something in-between?

For my own sake I can imagine a brief window after the 473 disaster of Winchester, in which Ambrosius might have more peasant labor on-hand than knights, and desired to throw up a speed-bump for raiders along the north of his rich lands in Salisbury and Silchester. The Wansdyke effectively wards the south downs from incursions originating from the Thames Valley--which means attacks sailing up the Thames and raiding south from it, as occurred following Winchester. If attacks from north of the Thames were the main focus, we'd expect to see the fords fortified (they were) and manors acting as quick-response posts... yet here is the wall some distance south of the river.

So... thoughts?

--Khanwulf 

While not necessarily Arthurian, can you suggest adventure seed sources focused around squires?

Thanks Morien, and bookmarked for sure!

On these tables I've often wished for a set of instructions to go with it. 

For example it seems to apply to the males of the family, broadly, and to knights for the solos. Am I correct?

So if I wanted to do a thorough family event check I'd roll for every male in the family including the PK?

--Khanwulf 

22 minutes ago, jeffjerwin said:

I think the main question is, 'does Merlin have some sort of goal in mind involving Arthur and the Grail?'

It may be irrelevant, given that he vanishes before the Grail Quest or its prologues begin, but the romances do specify that he had some definite interest in the Grail. In the Didot Perceval he comes back (or his ghost does) and advices Percivale on his quest.

The other main clues that indicate that the Round Table and the Grail are closely linked are the prophecy that the Quest can only begin when every seat is filled, and the obvious connection between the Perilous Seat and the Grail - it designates the Grail hero's place, as well as the utter unraveling of Arthur's kingdom after the Quest, as if it had served its purpose.

Merlin was a collector of magical objects, and perhaps he simply intended to fuse the Grail kingdom with the Round Table, bringing it to Camelot. If you see him as malevolent, perhaps he created the Round Table in order to secure the Grail for his private collection. He is, after all, the Son of the Devil. Or perhaps he simply foresaw that the Wasteland and the Quest would be the gravest challenge for Britain and Arthur and wished to make the king and his followers ready for it.

There are indications that some sort of plan or process was repaired by the appearance of Galahad; the Vulgate makes reference to Lancelot's former destiny to achieve the Grail, which he fails by his love affair (curiously, Vivianne and Nimue seem to encourage the affair). There are also versions of the story where Percivale and Gawaine are the Grail hero. Gawaine would represent the archetype of a dauntless hero rather than a pious Templar, but the Post-Vulgate makes his fall even more dramatic than Lancelot's. It may be noteworthy that Arthur's kingdom is the very model of a Celtic hero-band but is not very good at being a Christian state. Since it is 'designed' by Merlin, perhaps he wanted the heroic 'fight your way to the artifact' and 'bring it back gloriously' route all along. This might actually put him at odds with the Grail kingdom, and suggests the Table was an imitation, rather than a relic of the Grail realm itself. But Providence intervened...

Good points. My interest is 'what makes a curious and clever story' using the components here and in fidelity to the sources. 

And the Grail in its intersection with Camelot and the characters is an intriguing and incomplete mystery, not the least that it can *look* simple on its surface, but simply... isn't.

Merlin himself is a hugely conflicted character, since he does things and DOESN'T do things that leave us wondering "just which side are you on old man?" Merlin's answer would be "Britain's!" But what does that actually mean is unanswered. Then you have Merlin's betrayal by his apprentice/lover, and other associated figures who seem to work cross-purpose part of the time but not all of it. 

So anytime I see "Merlin did X" it makes me start to wonder.

In any event, back to the list of knights: looks handy! Is there a Google spreadsheet version of it out there that we could contribute to? There are quite a few knights from other books (other than GPC) missing, especially from early phases.

--Khanwulf

41 minutes ago, Tizun Thane said:

I don't understand. The creation of the RT by Merlin makes sense to me. It's a good explanation, and frankly, my players never asked any question at all, so ... why bother with a convoluted explanation about the Grail kingdom?

Only if the Grail Kingdom is represented as an actual "historical" entity in temporal Britain does it become an issue. In that case... why is Merlin off creating artifacts instead of finding existing ones? (Which is what he does otherwise.)

It's also a matter of which type of Merlin you want to portray, and how much grail history to bring in. If the Grail is going to serve as a McGuffin to highlight a spiritual quest arc and heal Arthur+Britain, then you probably won't much care who is associated with a kingdom that seems as much in Faerie as associated with a real place. (Turning Castle?)

So it's a matter of emphasis. RT by Merlin for Uther may be entirely sufficient.

--Khanwulf

Ok, so the sources aren't much help, and if Cambria is done as a book there will likely be a great deal of inference drawn between historical and Arthurian characters. Such is life, and thus YPMV.

This is potentially useful along these lines: https://www.timelessmyths.com/arthurian/housegrail.html

Back to the Round Table. 

If Uther's table is based on the table within the spiritual kingdom of the Grail, and the Kingdom of the Grail was at one point (early 400s) a northern powerhouse, could we presume that Uther's table was less manufactured by Merlin and more procured by him  from the remnants of said kingdom? (Merlin himself being a northern figure originally.)

In which case the Table (big "T") was made in emulation of the smaller spiritual kingdom table, which was made probably back when the Grail arrived in Britain was became occulted in its protective "kingdom".  

This sound... plausible?

--Khanwulf

On 9/6/2019 at 5:58 PM, jeffjerwin said:

The 'wasting' of the Grail Kingdom is described independently in several romances: at first it seems - as in Chretien - to be the result of war (possibly even started by Arthur). In the Post-Vulgate it takes on the supernatural character we see in KAP. The Varlon-Lambor war was the previous explanation, not really superseded, that seems to explain its disintegration. I think of Pellam's Grail kingdom as the mere rump of a larger and richer realm that covered much of the North before Lambor's death. Note his enemy is sometimes described as a brother or cousin, so it may be a civil war, though conversely he is also described as a convert to Christianity, which might seem to rule that out.

Having Lamorak the Elder as a bridge between the Round Table and the Grail Knights may be useful. He was killed by his friend Breunor, 'the Good Knight without Fear' in the romance of Guiron prior to the death of Uther, but not long before, according to that romance, so there may not be an opportunity for him to leave Uther and join the Grail Knights.

There are some interesting bits here that I don't believe were captured by Sires. (Correct me if wrong.)

So Lamorat(k) was Pellinore's cousin. Can we assume he was older? And it was Pellinore who inherited a kingdom--a fragment we can presume of the larger Grail Kingdom shattered by Varlon's treachery probably in 410-425, with subsequent civil war fragmenting everything.

I suppose Cunedda was part of this family as well, though I may be mixing historical and Arthurian characters; perhaps Pellinore or his father = Cunedda?

One thing I'd be very interested in understanding is whether it would be plausible for Pellinore to be a squire in 477, squired to perhaps an older Lamorat, himself a knight alongside friend Sir Breunor.

(I want do run some "Ambrosian Squire High School" adventures and let the PKs meet future luminaries such as Pellinore and Madoc around this time.)

--Khanwulf

3 hours ago, jeffjerwin said:

This is Lamorak or Lamorat the Elder, brother of Pellinore and namesake of his nephew. He ultimately derives from Llywarch hen, the poet and prince of Rheged (and lineal ancestor of the House of Aberffraw, the princes of Gwynedd).

He is definitely a member of the Grail family, and possibly a Grail knight. Llywarch hen bears the severed head of Urien, his kinsman, back from his fatal battle near Lindisfarne in a poem attributed to him. There's an overlap between Urien and *Brien, Brons, and with the severed head in the Grail in Peredur.

However, the Grail kingdom suffered a serious calamity after Varlon (alias Urlains - Brien/Urien's evil double) slew king Lambor, who was Pellinore and Lamorak the Elder's grandfather. I'm not sure that the kingdom could really maintain a household of knights. In Parzival, there are the Templeisen, who are the Grail Knights, but they seem to be few in number. Wagner of course represents Gornemant/Gurnemanz as one of them, and Klingsor as a failed postulant. It may be that they continue in secret.

The Queste and most other Grail romances ultimately ask the Grail knights to surrender their allegiance to Arthur. If Lamorak the Elder became a Grail knight, it would be in conflict with his homage to Uther.

 

Edit: Uther and Arthur represent worldly loyalty and the Grail represents homage to Christ. Hence while sovereignty descends from God, and the king is God's vicegerent - he is also human and inferior to God. Usually a knight serves both, but... Uther in particular is not a good Christian.

So.. in KAP timeline when might Varlon kill Pellinore's grandfather and shatter the strength of the Grail Kingdom?

Can we assume this kingdom is/was located in the Lake District, then? And is that kingdom partially translated into Faerie on or after Lambor's death?

Perhaps Lamorak the Elder became a Grail Knight first? Or did so after Uther died?

If Uther's Round Table was intended by Merlin (whether made by him or not) to be a representation of the Grail Table, such that it would draw the Grail into Britain and bestow spiritual sovereignty onto the king, then it may be irrelevant that Uther was such a poor Christian ruler--or on the other hand it might explain how the table was handed over for safe-keeping in anticipation of Arthur. (Whether or not Uther's close confidents knew and prepared for Arthur or not.)

--Khanwulf

Interesting.

So either a) Merlin made the table in emulation of the smaller Grail Table as a means of drawing the Grail into the mortal world, or b) the table was acquired by Uther--perhaps from Tintagel where Igraine had it?

Or perhaps Uther instituted the table as a means of securing his reign during the transition from Ambrosius--a transition I've often thought went very smoothly, despite the failure to appoint him High King, of course.

Makes me wonder if the association with Uther's table and the Grail Table might have meant that some of Uther's knights went off to populate the Grail Court. 

--Khanwulf

So... Uther had a round table? When did this get established (KAP) and who were its members?

I do seem to recall something to the effect that this was so, in a source, and that the table was given to Leodegrance for safekeeping....

Also, where did Uther get the table from? Do we know?

--Khanwulf