Luca Cherstich

@Greyblade I was thinking about doing something similar with Access...but a Wiki would be more useful for sharing online with players.

Off course the problem remains about backing-up the information. But another issue that I see is that, If I manage to use a wiki, I can do pages with images (Heraldry, maps, portraits) and they may be useful. 

And again, especially regarding maps from KAP books: how much can we use them in these services? I've seen many campaigns in Obsidian sharing Pendragon maps....but isn't it illegal since it's under copyright? Wouldn't it better to something with limited acced and not public?

I have no idea if this is the right place to ask but, since I've seen a recent post on Fantasy Grounds, I'll also ask here.

I've noticed that playing in KAP for my group means adding a HUGE amount of background/story information after every session, whether it's feast, a battle or an adventure.

NPCs (official or ad--hoc created), Heraldry, geography, history, without considering all the families and related topics, manors, etc....I start feeling that maybe my players will become lost at some point.

So, for the first time after 30 years in the RPG world, I start feeling the need of an online Campaign Manager, especially in terms of a Wiki which my players can check.

We are playing on Roll20 these days of COVID, but I know there's a limit on what you can put in Roll20 Handouts.

I really need a Wiki-style thing!

Any suggestion?

I've seen there are many KAP campaigns on Obsidian Portal, but there are so many alternatives (LegendKeeper, WorldAnvil, Chronica Ventures, Yarps etc... although some of these are in BETA) and maybe I can even try to create something through Google Sites or maybe some other free Wiki creator... if it is not too much time-consuming/difficult to use or manage.

I have absolutely NO IDEA of what would be the best option but I would like to know other people's opinions and real experiences (especially in this forum of KAP experts!).

My main doubts are:

1.  Something with enough space (maps, Heraldry, maybe some other images), since you always need more! Most of the images can be of low quality/dimensions, but off course there are so many of them!
2. Something which will be safe  and which can be trusted (I do not want to play KAP for years....and losing ALL the information/time spent since the website disappears).
3. Related to the above question: any way to download/backup the information?
4.  I would also like to have some advice about how to use official Chaosium KAP material (maps, Heraldry, etc.): can they be used online without breaking Copyright? Maybe in a "private-not-public accessible" Wiki?
5. Something affordable, although I've seen that most of these services are relatively cheap if not free, so I can afford them and (related question): something which, if I do not pay my fee for a month, does NOT delete all the information.

Any suggestion?

OK, I got it...that's a "Do it Yourself" approach, and somehow makes sense to me. I'll make mix and match the systems according to the situation.

I just hope that 6th edition will get these thinsg cleaerer! 

Or maybe I just add up the most "meaningful" combat skills....so that in case of fighting VS many enemies I do not record who used what skills among the many unnamed NPCs

OK. The rule of summing-up USED combat skills + some 1% glory (if noble) sound nice.

Still do not know what to do with Saxon Chieftains (maybe I calculate fake, random glory), and still do not understand how this fit with the "35 Glory Saxon Raider" but, I guess, it will be OK in any case.

Thanks.

Just by chance I happened to read throught the "Quest of the Red Blade"....and it looks like it has some Glory award indication, and Iask myself how it relates to the indications in KAP 5.2.

Page 15: 100 Glory to EACH KNIGHT....so, does it mean that Task Glory should not be divided?

Furthermore basic enemy warriors are worth 20 Glory....is this based on the "Pict Warrior" in the Glory table in Core Rules 5.2?

(which also means that "ordinary bandits" are weaker than common warriors....but why Saxons in the Core Rules table give more glory than ordinary Pict Warriors?).

50 minutes ago, Morien said:

If you go with 5th Edition, human opponents ought to be worth the skills they use in combat + 1% of their Glory, IIRC. Commoners ought to have very little in the way of Glory, so easier to just ignore it. Saxon chieftains and thegns probably have some Glory, so you can eyeball it, depending on how notorious they are in your game. (EDIT: OK, nevermind. Apparently the above was Greg's own house rules on his webpage back in the day, and since 5.0 didn't have the Glory table in the book, he just told people to use the Glory calculation on his webpage. For some reason I thought it was the official rule, but I couldn't find it in 5.x rulebooks.)

Highest combat skill or sum all the combat skills?

By the way, the rules sounds nice, although it does not make sense for all enemies.

A Saxon Raider gives 35 Glory, but a Saxon Warrior has Axe 14 in the NPC chapter .... does it means that it has 2100 Glory?? Isn't it too much?

I know that awarding glory is not an exact science and your Pendragon may vary, etc...

I've been trying to use KAP 5.2 p. 121-128 and 255-257 as a guidance.

A few doubts:

1) "SUCCESFUL TASK" AWARDS

Are the suggested amount DIVIDED among the knights or each knigt gets that amount?

E.g. 4 knights participate to an adventure which is an Heroic Task =100 Glory.

Does each of them get 25 or 100?

I mean, I know that the text says "received an equal share of Glory" but again, I'm not native english speaker, so this gives me doubts about the "equal" and "share". 

2) DEFEATED ENEMIES

It is a pity that, while monster stats have also a "Glory Won" entry, the stats for human opponents do not have such an entry.

Off course the list on page 255 helps a lot and, at the end of the day, maybe even getting an enemy a few points of Glory wrong, will not be a drama.

However, that list is FAR from being complete.

For example a "Saxon Raider" should give 35 Glory....but to whom it refers among the Saxons on page 207? The Saxon Warrior, Berserker or Chieftain?

What should I do to calculate the Glory of defeating Saxon heroes/chieftains, not in that list?

I know that I can compare them to the different ranks of Knights stats on pages 204-205, using possible possible Glory levels and related awards on page 255...but isn't it too laborious?

And what is the difference in Glory between  Archers, Foor Soldiers and ROyals Guardsmen, given that none of them have Glory stats on page 255? 

Does anybody got a list of possible "Glory Won" entries, at least for the sample NPCs mentioned in the Core Rules?

3) GLORY AWARDS IN ARMY LISTS

One question: can I use the Glory Awards from Army lists (Book of Battle p.91-99, Book of Armies)??

I know that Book of Battle p. 91 says that the suggested Glory is LESS than what one would get in a single man-to-man combat, but I would like to know how those Glory awards in the army lists are calculated.

 If I know that those awards are 1/2 or 2/3 or any other formula, maybe it could be helpful for treating them as a guide!

What a pity!

I've often already used the name "Bishop Roger" in my games....I feel it will become "Abbot Roger Rhain" or something similar...

Furthermore, I guess it is not an Abbey strong enough for its Abbot to be called an "Abbot-Bishp", right?

So Book of Uther p.77 says that British Church has no Bishops!!

Now I understand why Church lands are more tied to local feudal lords.

One Question: what happens to the "Bishop Roger" of Sarum mentioned in the Core Rules?

Does it become the Abbot-Bishop "Rhain of the Rock" mentioned in BoU p.81?

This is even odder, since Roger was supposed to be "wealthy and wordly" while Rhain should be a member of the poor Russet Monks (as per table p.79)!

EDIT:

Without considering that Bishop Roger has some role in the GPC...

14 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Just trying to help a little here. Historically land given to the Roman Church belonged to the Roman Church and any surpluses would go to the larger church organization as a whole. So the abbot might have part of the surplus to the local Bishop, or Archbishop. Since British Christianity isn't centralized to the same extent, everything is kept more on a local level. 

It's much the same reason why the right to name the head of a chruch or abbey is more of a British thing than a Roman one, especially at the higher levels. 

I agree on the general stricter hierarchy that Roman Church and about the greater strength of what the Roman Church holds.

However, during the Middle Ages feudal nobles  (sometimes even here in Italy, where Church has always been strong) have tried to exert some control or exert some rights on church lands (although admitedly, quite often with poor successes and never at the scale that was practiced in northern europe).

So, yes, I understand now the reason for Roman Abbeys not giving surplus food but, given that in Estate it is said that Advowson is practiced only for small Roman churches, I guess some degree of variability can exist.

EDIT:

I'm re-reading Book of Uther...now maybe I start understanding why Abbeys are more "special" for the British Church: the have no Bishops to collect their money!!!

@Morien Thanks a lot!

I feel I'll post zillions of questions in this forum, since the quality of help from all of you is always so high!!

Now I'm frankly lost!!! We need a completely rewritten, clarified Book of Estate 2.0 or (let hope) they integrate the basis of it in what will be KAP VI without contradictions.

OK.... I try to get it...

1 hour ago, Morien said:

Thanks for pointing this out! Rereading pages 58 and 59, it is clear that the £1 is deferred from the Axe Abbey as render (the example of a British Abbey paying part of their endowment back to the estate), so the Axe Abbey should actually make £8, of which £1 is returned to the estate and £7 spent to keep the Abbey functional. In ADDITION, it may give a free Russet Monk Chaplain, which would turn £1 court expense into £1 Discretionary Funds, if the Estate Holder is happy with a Russet Monk Chaplain.

I re-read p.58-59, as you did, and I got even more confused, but I got the impression that Abbeys give MANY advantages, right?

At least two:
- Surplus Food (ONLY British Abbeys)

- Free Clerical Advisor +£1 Discretionary Funds.

DOUBT 1 (about SURPLUS FOOD given back to the Estate Lord, as per page 58-59)

"They are all endowed with holdings sufficient for their maintenance, and often with more than is needed. In such cases the excess may be returned to the estate, usually in the form of food render.The information is thus notated: Abbey £ 4 (from £ 19). This specifies the abbey harvests £ 19, pays £ 4 to the estate, and retains £ 15 for its own use."

The Bold part is mine. Is that the reason why you said that the Abbey has £1 endowed?

If So... the Abbey SHOULD NEED only £7 of endowment, but since it has £8, it can give £1 to the Estate Lord, right?

If this is the case, the Abbey in the example page 59 which gives £ 4 out of £19 can live only of £15 of endowment, but it has a surplus of £4, right? This means thatr it should be a huge Abbey with one abbot + at least 60 monks.

Maybe I got it....but Greg should have written it more explicitly (am I wrong?).

Furthermore: why is this "Surplus Food" only given by British Abbeys? Shouldn't we get similar benefits from Roman and Pagan (!) Abbeys?

1 hour ago, Morien said:

In ADDITION, it may give a free Russet Monk Chaplain, which would turn £1 court expense into £1 Discretionary Funds, if the Estate Holder is happy with a Russet Monk Chaplain.

DOUBT 2 (About the Clerical Advisor, bottom of page 59, fist column)
"The type of abbey is important because it can provide one clerical advisor for free to the landowner. If the estate holder chooses to do this, then he has one additional librum to use for discretionary money!"

So...this is +1 Discretionary Money in ADDITION to all other bonuses? If so it should be easy....just +£1 per Winter at the end of all calculations....

However, why are you saying that it turns Court Expense into Discretionary Money?

Is it written anywhere that this "Clerical Advisor" becomes the Chaplain?

I mean, subtracting £1 from Court Expense maybe somehow give you +£1 Discretionary Funds, but I got the impression that you can keep your chaplain + get the Clerical Advisor which give £1, right? 

DOUBT 3 (On Russet Monks)
Please, correct me if I'm wrong. From what you say it seems that Russet Monks are special....but from a mechanical point of view they remain the same as a Basic ""Clerical Advisor" described on page 59 right? Or do they give some other bonus explained anywhere else in the book? (excluding the part on recovering damaged lots)???

11 hours ago, Morien said:

Found it. Greg changed the Endowments between v1.2 and v1.3, and no one thought to check Axe. So Axe Abbey ought to be £7 to make it fit. The £1 that Axe estate gets is from the pilgrims (famous church strange things special). The Hundred Assized Rent should be £50.3 (Estate £43.2 + Abbey £7) and the hundred court profits £1.5, meaning the Axe Estate Customary Revenue ought to be £43.2+£1+1.5 = £45.7. That's how I would deal with it. (You could lower the Axe Estate Assized Rent instead by £4, thus keeping the Hundred Assized Rent the same. But personally I would rather keep the Estate value and just boost the whole Hundred a bit.)

This makes sense!!

My doubts/Notations:

- the £1 which I feel it's not from famous abbey but from the £1 of Free Income which abbey give, as per page 59 "one additional librum").

- the Hundred Court profit should be 3% of the hundred Assized Rent (as per Estate p.56), so the 3% is of the TOTAL assized rent of the Hundred (including the £7 of the Abbey now own by the Lord of the Estate) which is: £50.2.

So….the TOTAL Hundred Assized Rent SHOULD BE £50.2 but the Abbey got £7 in endowment = the Lord of Axe has only £43.2 in Assized Rent.

The 3% of 50.2 = £1.5 (as you said!).

OK, so....just let me check I welll understood (sorry I'm not native english speaker and Estate is so badly written).

TEXT AS IT IS:

Customary Revenue: £44.2+£1.4 = £45.6

Axe Hundred (with Court), Ascalon

Assized Rent: £43.2 in Render

Additions: Axe Abbey £1 (from £3)

Hundred Court Profits: £1.4; moot at Axe

Held by Others: Axe Abbey (£3, above)

Outliers: Thornvale

CHANGES (IN BOLD)

Customary Revenue: £44.2 (which is made of Assized Rent + £1 from Abbey) +£1.5 Hundred Court = £45.7

Axe Hundred (with Court), Ascalon

Assized Rent: £43.2 in Render (this is the part owned by the Lord of the State, the total Hundred AR is £50.2)

Additions: Axe Abbey £1 (from £7)

Hundred Court Profits: £1.5 (This is 3% of the TOTAL Hundred Assized Rent); moot at Axe

Held by Others: Axe Abbey (£7, above)

Outliers: Thornvale

Right?

Another question, this time on Book of Estate and especially the "Endowment" = a part of land (= Assized Rent?) that you give permanently to a religious institution.

Maybe I asked about it in the past in the old forums (but I was not able to find it) or maybe not, but now that I'm doing this game more seriously I need to understand!

The Abbey (p.86) says it requires an Endowment of £3 for the abbot + £4 (£1 for five monks x 4 since there is a minimum of 20 monks).

Given the above simple calculation it is clear that £7 is the basic endowment required to for the smallest Abbey.

HOWEVER, looking at the estate examples of Axe (on p.61) it is clear that the Axe Abbey owns only £3 of land....how can that be?

Here I have 3 options:

1) Axe example is wrong

2) Endowment description is wrong

3) I've not understood anything! (which is frankly quite possible, since I'm not a native english speaker! And Book of Estate has its own problems in explaining things...)

Any suggestion?

@kilgs Thank you for the very accurate help!

I'll try what I can, and maybe I'll join the Discord Channel. How can I do that?

In the campaign that I've started only 1 PC is a Vassal Knight with manor, the other 3 are all Household Knights.
Getting a manor or estate (and maybe get married) are among their future aims and dreams: this is why I tried to understand the situation of feudal holdings in Salisbury.

But, given the difficulty that I have understanding the confusing status of published information, I feel that I'll just go on a day-by-day basis, trying to understand the picture or creating my own stuff only according to the specific story needs, whatever the official books say...although it is frankly a bother, given that I paid money for Uther, Warlord and the Map Folio!!

They are all good books and great material to read and get tons of inspiration about so many topics (especially Uther) ... but the whole place names problems is just so bad, as it is bad that they spoke about hundreds, without proper indications about how to use them in Salisbury.

I understood that Greg Stafford said that Nocturnal was meant to update sooner or later Uther/Warlord/Estate going back to the modern names ... but as we all know, it never happened.

Do we know if Chaosium ever got an official position about the problem?

After all, they are still selling PDFs of Uther/Warlord/Estate with the New/Abandoned naming system.

4 minutes ago, fulk said:

gran roturre di palle.

AH! Thank you for putting some good Italian!

23 minutes ago, Morien said:

WARLORD, p. 97: "Salisbury has hundreds held by Clarence (Hillfarm), the Marche (Mere), Bishop of Venta (Chalkhill), Thornbush Castle (Swans), and Caercolun (Studfold)."

I am pretty sure that Milkfield is mentioned somewhere as well... Hah, found it, UTHER, p. 107: "The Count of Salisbury claims the Westfort and Wheelwell hundreds, Baron Gentian seizes the Milkfield hundred and Duke of the Marche (who is also the Lord of Leir’s Castle) occupies
the Mere hundred."

WARLORD, p. 110: "The king holds Kingsguard Hundred as part of his personal demesne,"

OK....so

Hundred Mere to Duke of Marche = Sir Edaris

Hundred Milkfiled to Baron Gentian = Sir ????

Hundred Studfold to "Caercolun" = Sir ???????

Kingsguard Hundred to the King....but what about Woodhouse, since there's Prince Madoc Castle in Woodhouse?

What a mess!

I remember the whole name problem from the old forums and now that, for the first time, I'm starting doing KAP seriously as a GM, I realize the whole size of the mess!

It's difficult to explain to others things which are even unclear to me (we are all Italians, with minimal knowledge of UK geography at local level).

In any case, thanks a lot to all of you!

4 minutes ago, fulk said:

 

There is an API.  I used it ages ago do download the Domesday data to make a Book of Estate spread sheet.  You might try that.

 

Thanks a lot....but I do not know what an API is.

I've seen there are links about hundreds here suggested as "API methods"

https://opendomesday.org/api/

But really, if I click on them I just get a mess.

Question 5 Another question (Related to my question 1).

If I want to design my own new estates from those 7 "free" hundreds...but where can I see the Render/Assized Rent of the hundred?

I tried was Greg Stafford suggesting in Book of Estate p.109 and I went to the Open Domesday Book, but it was impossible to find the Salisbury Hundreds names.

I know there is a lot of change and fantasy compared to history, but I was wondering how do you all manage issues like these?

Just create ad-hoc assized rents without considering the possible medieval reality in Domesday Book?

I really feel we need the Book of Salisbury.

I know there are differences between the Salisbury maps in KAP 5.2 and the Salisbury map in Warlord.

I tried to make sense of it, trying to refer to Warlord, as the most updated version (and also since I use the new economy, so hundred division are useful).

However, I found some problems.

This is the list of Hundreds and to whom they belong:

- Count Roderick: Roedeer, Dovesfield, Vagon, Bran's Hill, Hillfort, Brichford, Ebble, Underditch, Elmstump, Alder, Thorngate.

- Dowry of Ellen (so I guess they belong to Baron Wynchbank in 479 and then go to Earl Roderick with Marriage) : Anna's Water, Chiefsfield, Barehill.

- King Cadwy of Summerland (conquered by Earl Roderick in 482): Wheelwell, Westfort

- Sir Duach Baron of Wereside: Wereside

- Duke Eldol of Glevum: Hillfarm

- Baron Staterius of Thornbush: Swans 

- Abbot-Bishop Dylwin of Ambrius Abbey: Ambrius

- Prince Madoc: Woodhouse (he rules the castle, so I guess maybe also this small hundred)

Given this list, here are my questions:

1) Question 1

There are 7 Hundres in Salisbury with no holder published in the books, right?
They should be: Beautyfield, Churchford, Mere, Milkfield, Studfold, Kingsguard, Boarswood (also a Free Manor), 

Is this correct? We do not have yet any published book about their lords, right?

If so, I was thinking about using them to design new estates, maybe to be used for awarding prizes to the PCs from the King and maybe I can make them hold by random NPC lords for the moment.

2) Question 2

Where is the Forest of the Trench (which is often mentioned in Book of Warlod, as a holding of Earl Roderick?). It does not appear in any map!

3) Question 3

I guess all basic £10 manors from KAP 5.2 (and the manors which 5.2 say to belong to heiresses) should be in the Earl's hundreds....are these single £10 subtracted from the assized rent of the Earl? (I Know it does not matter in terms of story....but I just want to know).

3) Question 4

There are so many differences between KAP 5.2. place-names and map and these new maps.
For example in KAP 5.2 p.71 Sir Hywell is the Banneret of West Lavington and Sir Amig is the castellan of  TIlshead.

Now it seems that both places are gone and Amig is just the Dapifier.

I have a suspect that Tilshead = Borders Castle (since they are both fortified towns), even if Borders is now rules by an otherwise unknon Sir Bryn (or Sir Hyfaidd according to the Marriage of Count Roderick).

Am I correct? 

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

IMO there should probably be a minimum  SIZ threshold, as a difference between the two combatants for the height and/or reach modifiers to kick in.  At least 10 points, although I think 15, 20, or even 25 would work out better. That way the spread would be wide enough to encompass most humans, and make most animals too small to get a height bonus (most aren't taller than people), while still leaving the door open for the really big creatures and monsters, such as elephants, giants and dragons. 

Good idea! This size difference makes sense, but I'm yet to understand where the right threshold value should be.