Jump to content

Luca Cherstich

Regulars
  • Content Count

    119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

11 Good

About Luca Cherstich

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    Being interested and playiing a lot of Rpgs since 1990....in no particular order (mixing old and new stuff): Tunnels & Trolls, D&D (mainly red box, AD&D 32 and 3.5), Conan (d20, 2d20), Pendragon (5th ed.), Vampire, Cyberpunk 2020, Ars Magica, L5R, CallOfCthulhu, One Ring, Eclipse Phase (1st ed.), Shadowrun (2nd and 3rd edition), Blood&Honor (by JohnWick), etc...and many many others I do not remember!
    I've been helping Riotminds with very, very small contributions to the amazing Trudvang Chronicles and Lex Occultum.
  • Current games
    Pendragon
  • Location
    Vacri - CH, ITALY
  • Blurb
    I'm an Italian Archaeologist with field experiences in Italy (off course!), Libya and Cyprus.

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. In Book of Uther there's a lot of tinkering, trying to change some details of the GPC chronology. I frankly like some of the events (like the bloody crowning of Aescwine in 487), however I feel there are also some errors. Page 114 In 485 "Caercolun is occupied by Saxons", and I feel this is OK. In 486 "All of Caerwent, farm and forest, falls to the Saxons". QUESTION: is this second event an error??? Is King Aescwine really conquering not just Caercolun but ALL the Caerwent region (which means also the area which in 500 will be invaded by the Angli)? The GPC maps for the year 487 and later (p.41 and 53, for example) do not show a Saxon-occupied Caerwent, but maybe Greg was changing things heavility in Book of Uther. Any suggestion?
  2. I agree. After thorough thinking I decided to ignore the rule. I can maybe apply it to very, very specific cases (like a knight falling in love with an elven lady) but, in general, it's not fun. A GM decides to send the knights to faerie and they return with this curse which is not their fault....it does not sounds fun.
  3. Even if in Uther's times, long before enchantment spreads, I decided to make them deal with Faerie, especially when exploring some faerie-connected places like the darkest woodlands which separate Salisbury from Cadwy's Summerland. I've seen the "Fey" passion on the GPC (which is, in too many ways, a real curse)....what are your experiences with this rule? I mean: I do not want to give a Fey passion after every meeting with Faerie (since it seems too much), but I'll maybe give it after VERY CLOSE contact with Faerie or after a long scene in the Faerie world. How do you manage this passion? (including aquiring/loding it) I was thinking about allowing Love-Family or Love-God rolls just to avoid acquiring the passion (rather than to make those rolls to delete the Fey passion later on). Any opinion regarding or game experience regarding the use of the Fey passion?
  4. I guess that having scattered holdings (please, somebody correct me if I am wrong) is more respondent to historical medieval holdings-types. But I'm ignorant about British feudalism, although I know that scattered holdings are typical of other other areas of Europe that I'm more familiar with. The question remains: even if historical (and the "historicity" of KAP is an issue...)I feel that this scattered holdings models should be kept as long as it is not a hindrance for game play. I personally like it (it gives me some sense of authenticity), however, sometimes it is odd to explain to players (questions like "Wasn't Ulfius the Baron of Silchester as Roderick is the Baron of Salisbury?").
  5. Reading Warlord p.116 I realized that Sir Blains's Levcomagus is only a £18.5 Manor!! This means that Blains is just him + (maybe) a household knight!! How could have such a lowly knight have aspired to marry Ellen (the daughter of a baron)?? I know that "Ulfius" is the answer... Furthermore, how could have done the famous Allington Raid/Skirmish in the Core Rules, where he leads various knights vs Salisbury? I got the feeling that when rules were originally written Silchester was a "unity", while now we get so many different barons with interests/holdings in Silchester (Ulfius, Thornbush, Wynchbank before he dies, the Senate of Silchester...). So, I guess, Sir Blains either has many relatives/friends helping in his raids or some bigger lord (possibly Ulfius?) gives him more knights because he wants bad things for Salisbury. Is this correct?
  6. We need to knighten a couple of younger brothers when they are 19 and 20, instead of 21. I've found in BoK&L p.68 that the minimum age requirement is 18....but what about mechanics? I've seen Morien's suggestions on doing Step.3 the other way around.... https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/10356-moriens-house-rules/?tab=comments#comment-153611 ....But, do we have any other official answer in the books? I mean: if I well understood, Morien's suggestion is 2 options per year = -1 Attribute and -1 trait/passion?? Since subtracting 1d6 skill points seem odd. OK?
  7. One suggestion: be careful NOT to over-use this book. I would say: use it no more than once every one or two years. I really like it and at some point I even used it twice in a single year due to the presence of TWO different important marriages.....but I'll wait some times before I'll use it again. 155 cards seems a lot, but they really are not and using this book every year will make some cards to appear more frequently. Off course I always interpret cards, adapting the results to the NPCs which I know are present to the specific situation....but I do not want to waste the surprise for players. For example In the last two feasts I've noticed that there are too many cards with unknown ladies to be involved.
  8. I like Book of Feast but I have thus far avoided using it for any social meeting or court, in order to speed up things and allow some variety in the game experience. Sometimes I use a lot of ad-hoc GM& player improvisation or, if I'm bored, I roll on the "Courtly Experience" table from this pdf. https://www.chaosium.com/content/FreePDFs/Pendragon/NM14 - Marriage of Count Roderick.pdf Furthermore, Book of Uther p. 60-62 has some tables for creating very quick adventure-hooks for court intrigues, but you have to work developing them.
  9. For what is worth, I've used three times and had a lot of fun, creating incredibly good hooks for new stories which were developed later on. regarding playing online: I make the players roll 1d155 and then I post the Jpeg of the Card. It works for us!
  10. How many skills do you give per Squires? BoE p.13 shows a "Squire Sheet" with many skills but, in reality, the other column seems to imply the use of One Single value for ALL the "Knightly Skills" of the Squire (which is frankly more respondant to the Skill Sheet on page 43 which has only a couple of entries for skills).
  11. As a curiosity regarding normal NPC squires (not PC squire): what will most people use? The Squire rules in KAP core rules (Age, couple of skills)? Or those in Entourage (more skills, Squire skill separated from Age and often, therefore, lower than in the basic system)?
  12. OK...but if I start applying the "Conspicous Consumption" Glory award to each +£1 beyond £6, it will become another (very small but continuous) Glory bonus for anyone having larger than basic manors (due to the new Standard of Living calculation) and which applies every year. I'm tempted to use the "£1 = +2 Glory" from BoE only because I suspect (am I wrong?) that the new correction was not updated in 5.2... I really like the Estate/Warlord system. Maybe it's only badly explained, but it is great. I really hope they will integrate it in the 6th edition, but also hope that they will show clear indications about the minutiae of the linked sub-systems (Glory award rates, standards of Living, Entourage, etc...).
  13. 1) Now that you mentioned BoEnt... I have the revised edition (which I guess you worked on) and it says +1 Glory per £1 of expenses in retinue....I guess this Glory bonus is only for people you hire with Discretionary Finds Beyond those servants mentioned in the models? 2) Are you doing a house rule of Cospicuos Consumption of £1 = 10 Glory instead than the basic £1 = 1 Glory? Or is the amount shown in Core Rules wrong?
  14. OK...but in Estate p.40 (and Warlord p.169) Extra squires are not included in the Standard of Living part, but are calculated as to be detracted from Discretionary Funds. So the £50 estate holder spends £10 to live as a Rich Knight but also spend + £1 from Discretionary Funds to have a second squire... Are you saying that this system is wrong? (even if apparently repeated twice in both Estate and Warlord?).
  15. OK...so £9 for Rich and £12 for Superlative? OK....we know that the new model for the "Standard or Living" cost is = to that formula (Family Expenses (10% of CR) + Pay Bonus + £5) So....whatever the result, +10 Glory per Extra above £6? What do you suggest? It sounds OK and clearly Easy Fix, although it is clearly more (x10) generous in Glory than the typical "Conspicuous Consumption" of £1 = +1 Glory. What's the maximum cap? 100 Glory?
×
×
  • Create New...