Jump to content

TerryTroll

Members
  • Content Count

    26
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About TerryTroll

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 05/30/1970

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    Been gaming since the 1980's, CoC is probably my favourite game over all, but I have played and read countless RPGs over the years.
  • Current games
    Running - Pendragon (GPC), Playing - Pathfinder (RotR, CotCT)
  • Location
    Liverpool, UK
  • Blurb
    Grey haired old gamer, that loves modern narratives games and the old classics.

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. You might want to try https://www.wargamesfoundry.com/ they have a nice range of Dark Ages, Viking, Saxons and Normans plus Medieval miniatures from Early to Late periods.
  2. You might as well remove Glory while you are at it. I wouldn't call that a pro-tip myself. They have pretty much been the driving force behind most of the conflicts and drama in our game so far. Without them you might as well not be playing Pendragon IMHO. I'm not sure Pendragon needs much streamlining to be honest. It is a pretty straight forward system until you use the battle rules or get into the nitty gritty of running an estate (it these if anything that need streamlining).
  3. What if they were assigned to Prince Madoc say for raiding, but the Earl himself didn't go? Would they swear an oath to Prince Madoc at that point, which would last for the time they were on the military campaign, even though they still vassals for the Earl?
  4. Thanks for all the advice, it seems I was in error to give them the Loyalty in the first place. I suspect I gave it when it was technically as oath of Fealty on a campaign under Uther, would that only last for the duration of the military campaign? It hasn't come up much until recently, and I think Loyalty (Roderick) would have been enough to make them consider informing on Cornwall's escape plans anyway. As he is a vassal of Uther and they would know it would make him look bad if it happened on his knight's night watch. So things would have played out the same anyway. On top of that I'll give them all a directed trait of Mistrust Uther as well for what they have witness or know first hand. Also checking his character sheet he had Hospitality 18, so would have attempted to inform anyway. I've recently got the Book of the Estate, which breaks Loyalty down into Homage and Fealty, so I think I will make clearly that they have a oath of Homage (Roderick), they may well have one of Fealty during campaigning to Uther. I'm then planning to keep Loyalty but use that only between fellow knights, no land or even a significant social penalty for breaking it, but it gives an idea of how much trust and friendship or debt there is between them.
  5. I hope so, I like presenting players with difficult decisions. Although I'm not sure how the players feel when Pendragon as a system can take sometimes take certain decisions away from them due to passions, or traits. I kind like when the system forces you into a position you might not really want to be in but, if your the sort of player use to playing Chaotic Good/Neutral in D&D it can be a bit of a paradigm shift, and hard to adjust to.
  6. The PCs are Vassals of Earl Roderick, and have fought in the army of King Uther and Price Madoc on various occasions, but they are vassals of Earl Roderick.He has rewarded them on several occasions, but they have not been given land by him, so not direct vassals. So indirectly via Earl Roderick. So should they not really have any Loyalty to start with? They didn't see the transformation itself but were at Tintagel that night spotted some weird goings on and directly confronted Merlin. The main kicker however was earlier two of the PKs were in the process of courting Handmaids to Duchess Ygraine and one was approached to aid in their leaving London, they were made aware of the King's actions towards Ygraine (who half of the knights had some feelings for one way or another). The group ended up on watch at one of the gates and as Duke Gorlois' party approached they questioned them. "Does the King know your are leaving?" Duke Gorlois was very careful with his answer. "The King has made it plain, my presence is no longer desired here." he did not say that it was by his actions rather than his words. So they knew the Duke left without bloodshed and could see that he left with very little so they could travel faster. Later when King Uther states "The Duke of Cornwall has broken his word and violated our hospitality. His sudden flight from our court proves he is guilty; no other information need be sought. Worse, though, his people slew some servants in their escape, and they stole treasure when they fled." They knew the accusations to be false, and the King's motivation (two of them only helped Ygraine escape for a similar motivation). Yeah they were aware of a lot of it because of their position and relationships with Duchess Ygraine's handmaids, I suspect I made an error granting them Loyalty without an official oath in the first place (first time running), but it set up a nice conflict of interest with his desire for the lady he was courting so. Would it be easiest to just admit it was an error and cancel it as they are not direct vassals?
  7. My player knights aided the Cornwall court to flee London, then heard King Uther declare Duke Gorlois, a traitor, a thief and murder (killing guards and stealing treasure) when they knew this wasn't true. They then went to Tintagel and witness Merlin's magic pressing him for an explanation as to how Duke Gorlois could be in two places at once. They rightly asked considering the events they had witness, would their Loyalty (Uther) drop, some of them would lose out on Glory as their current Loyal is over 16. If it would (and I think it should) how much do you think it should drop, is there any guide for this?
  8. Typical knight does 4d6 or 5d6, with the -1d6 for a dagger, that's 3d6 or 4d6. The weaker knight isn't going to get through armour and shield very often, and needs to roll above average to get through just armour against another knight. Seems it would happen a lot, assuming they even succeed, as their dagger skill isn't going to match sword.
  9. Is the best time to move from manor to estate during the anarchy period where you can just make a quick land grab, or offer protection to your neighbour if they basically become part of your holdings? Marrying your son off to a allied neighbour seems a good move as well, if something were to happen to his sons. On the other hand... I'm currently 490 marrying two of my Player Knights off to maidens from Cornwall as Earl Roderick thought it strengthen the relationship with Duke Gorlois... well if they must wait around so long, they will get pushed into a political marriage. Visiting any holdings they get could be tricky in the future.
  10. Am I correct in thinking most new manors that the players get to expand to having an estate wouldn't actually be adjacent to their existing manor? They marry a widow the chance of that widow's lands being near the knights are low. If they conquer a new area for the king, again it isn't likely to be near their existing manor. Aren't the players likely to end up with little packets of land all over the country rather than vast estates and "huge tracks to land"?
  11. Campaign started in 485, we are currently playing Pathfinder, but when I'm back to running it will be the start of 490, so the knights are going to be 26. The married Knight who got married in 488, has still yet to produce an heir, although he has a bastard son growing up with a farmer's wife (unknown to him or the farmer) in Imber that would now be five. He has two younger brothers, and a much younger half-brother (as his mother remarried after his father died, the step-father has eyes on his manor). One unmarried knight also has a bastard from a knight celebrating in Imber, although the serving maid died in childbirth, and the boy has since come to live on his manor, and another bastard in Frankland from the last campaign. He also has a younger brother. The other unmarried knight has insisted on being Chaste and has not even fathered a bastard in all those years. He two has a younger brothers. So it's not like they couldn't continue the family with a younger brother if they happened to die unexpectedly.
  12. No, I'm not that cruel, really we just like having a laugh at the player doing the voice.
  13. We found that alone was surprisingly significant in our game. We had one character dump stat Appearance, having it at only 6. He ended up with a high pitched, lisp and excessively hairy. We don't make him do the voice all the time, but every now and again when he is trying to do a speech or romance a maiden we tell him to say it again in the proper voice. Inspired from the clip below. Then he wonders why he never does well at orate.
  14. I'm not sure if it is feminist or not, but more down to how much work you want to put into NPCs. After all the Book of Entourage puts no more detail into the Husband for Lady characters than it does for the Wife of Player Knights. Only one of my PKs has got married so far, I think the Lord will need to put pressure on the others soon. The other players have been holding off because of the system in the KAP, which gives a bonus on the roll for delaying, but I'm switching to the rules in the Book of Entourage, so hopefully that will encourage them.
  15. The table in the Book of Entourage seems more generous to me than the one in 5.2 for example from 5.2 9-10 gets you a daughter of a household knight (£1d6 dowry) and only 50 glory 12-20 gets you a daughter of a vassal knight (£1d6 dowry) and 100 glory. but in Entourage 4-10 gets you Eldest daughter of a vassal knight or younger daughter of a rich vassal knight. Dowry: £1d6+6 treasure. and her glory is (5d6+10) × 10 times 1.5 minimum of 225 max 600. 11-12 Eldest daughter of a rich vassal knight or younger daughter of an estate holder. Dowry: £2d6+1 treasure. Her glory is in the range of 225 to 600. 13 and above leads to even better wives with the chance of land even under a roll of 20, where as with 5.2 you need to roll 21 or more to get additional land. Although it is unfair to compare like with like as you roll a d20 (with very few modifiers) on the first table and a d6 (with significant modifiers) on the Entourage one.
×
×
  • Create New...