Luca Cherstich

I tried creating a campaign, then I tried deleting it. I typed the campaign name and clicked on "delete" but no campaign was deleted

p.127, second column, Romantic Knight, Benefits. This section should include the benefit mentioned on p.89 (left column, first line) where a Lover (= A ROMANTIC KNIGHT) may attempt to invoke Adoration once per day at any time and for any reason.

p.238, second column, lower part. "Dagger becomes your Brawling Skill" misses an important part. Most old KAP 5.2 characters have the Dagger skill at low levels (5 or 6), however, according to Pendragon 6 p. 51 (footnote to Table 3.5) Brawling 10 is now required to be a knight. I feel the line should be changed into something like this: "Dagger becomes your Brawling Skill. If this value is lower than 10, Brawling will become 10."

Off course.....but again, there's a gap in the rules, as all sacred sites (near or distant) are on the same lists while the "£1 per 50 miles" or the Ascetic rules are the only (incomplete) "cost indicators".

You're right, that's a limitation, and somehow a balancing factor. Even so, too many pilgrimage sites are in Salisbury (Amesbury, Sarum Cathedral), adjacent counties(Glastonbury) or not very far counties (St. Illtud or the Wells of St. Winefride). Given that Salisbury is the default homeland for most games, there are frankly too many opportunities for knights with high Devotion to get the "Restore Characteristic" miracle. Furthermore....how do you deal with the costs for too near sites? The Salisbury sacred sites are less than 50 miles for Salisbury Knights: "Noble style" pilgrimage: will it still cost £1? "Ascetic style" pilgrimage: will you really get those checks and even the Aging roll.....for a trip which sometimes can be less than 1 day long? Imagine a household knight of Roderick/Robert, living in Sarum, and doing a pilgrimage to Salisbury Cathedral....which requires maybe 10 minutes of walk! Even Amesbury is 5 or 6 miles from Sarum....too many opportunities indeed.

P.217-218. The pilgrimage rules certainly lack some balancing mechanics, as discussed in the link below. Miracles are too powerful and too easy to get, especially for Salisbury knights with too many nearby holy sites.

You are right. I kind of feel that these pilgrimage rules miss some balancing mechanics, or maybe they were not tested enough.

Or maybe let combine the Devotion/Mileage limitation+ the penalty to the Devotion roll

P.238, second column, second paragraph. ".... your Dancing Skill of 2 is raised to the minimum default value of APP-5" This is wrong, as "APP-5" should be substituted by "DEX/2" to be consistent with Table 3.5 on page 51.

p.227, second column, "Step 3. Experience Rolls". "...but note that Characteristics have limitations to being increased this way. (See"Step 8. Training and Practice" on p.232.)" This whole part should be deleted due to two problems. It is not relevant to Experience Rolls, as characteristics do not gain experience checks, therefore characteristics cannot be raised through Experience rolls. p.232 shows no limit to characteristics (p.233 speaks about not raising them after age 35, while cultural Maximum for each characteristic is not on p. 232 but on p.46, Table 3.3). An alternative solution is to change "characteristics have limitations to being increased this way" with "characteristics cannot be increased this way". I would delete the reference to page 232.

I really like the idea of pilgrimages from p.217-218! It's brilliant. "Pilgrimages" cannot be obtained from table 13.2, so I guess someone needs to choose to go there (and I could maybe allow doing it even to someone who has played a short scenario this year). Nevertheless, I feel that some kind of limitations is missing. Salisbury (the most common Starting homeland) has too many sites (2 Christian and 2 pagan ones), therefore it is maybe too easy for most player knights to make pilgrimages. The only apparent limitation is the mention of "distant holy site" on p.217. How much is "distant"? I guess the minimum should be 50 miles (as it is the minimum to be paid for "noble style" pilgrimages as per p.218) but maybe we should also add the necessity of at least travelling to a different county. Any thoughts?

P.211, second column, first paragraph. "...Servants who can be let go on a whim, such as grooms and varlets, are Background Characters, discussed below." Unfortunately nothing about these servants is discussed below. Possibly to be changed into "discussed in the Noble's Handbook?"

two parts on Solo Scenarios are a bit confusing to me. P.221, the whole "Solo scenario" procedure is included as Step 1 of the Winter Phase procedure, and it is done "in order to get checks" which will be rolled on Step 3 of the Winter Phase. p.213, the "Solo scenario" procedure (including its own Step 1 and Step 2) seems to have its own "Roll for checks" part (Step 2), which therefore happens before Winter Phase step 3 (when it normally happens). This is not without consequences, as one can roll once and then get the same checks with personal events in Winter Phase step 2, only to roll again the same check in Winter Phase Step 3..... Furthermore the text on p.213 seems to suggest that it is possible to roll twice for the same checks, which is frankly negated by the normal procedure on p.227, where only 1 roll is allowed. I feel the confusing part is the existence of an explicit "Step 2" in the Solo Scenario" procedure which should exist only "to get checks", as suggested by p.221.

The new Favor system on p.204-206 is quite interesting, but I have a doubt. P.206 speaks about saving or returning a parent or warhorse = 1/10 their ransom or value. What if a knight saves MY life? What if an enemy spares ME instead of killing me? If I'm taken prisoner and a ransom is asked I guess I owe no favor to this enemy. However, what if he is quite Merciful and lets me go? In both cases I guess the rate for family members and warhorses (1/10 the ransom or value) is definitively too low. If I'm an honorable Vassal Knight (Ransom £10) and somebeody spares or save my life, a simple favor of £1 (1/10 or £10) is definitively too low. And for Houshold (£4) and Mercenary (£3) knights the rounding down gets to "0", even suggesting that no favor is due! Any suggestion or thought?

I'm a bit confused about the description of Chirurgery in Pendragon 6 p.198-199. I'm not sure whether this is really confusing....or maybe I'm just dumb, please correct me. - Natural Healing always happens at noon on sunday (p.198), albeit off course its effects may be nullified by Aggravation or Deterioration. - Aggravation (192-193) is subtracted when the aggravating action happens, and not at sunday. - Deterioration happens NEXT WEEK (p.199) but BEFORE the natural Healing (p.194), which means that I can maybe suffer Deterioration this sunday even if this Sunday's chirurgery roll was succesfull (as it will stop next week's deterioration). In theory, I can even DIE before the natural healing! - Chirurgery roll is usually made at noon on sunday (p.198-199). Now, given the above premises, the Chirurgery roll results on p.199 are a bit confusing to me. Critical Roll: "No deterioration occurs, and Natural Healing Rate is immediately added to current Hit Points." Success: "No Deterioration occurs". Failure: "Deterioration occurs" Fumble: "Deterioration occurs, and 1d6 Hit points are lost. Here are my doubts: Crititical roll: is the addition to current Hit Points independent from normal Natural Healing rate? So, does it means that this week the Natural Healing will be added TWICE (as in KAP 5)? I'm asking it since the Natural Healing is usually added whatever happens to the Chirurgery Roll. Fumble: Deterioration is 1d6 to be lost next week but what is this further d6? A d6 to be lost NOW?