Jump to content

Cornelius

Members
  • Content Count

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About Cornelius

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Converted

  • RPG Biography
    player and GM for over 20 years.
  • Current games
    King Arthur Pendragon,
  • Blurb
    This is nuts
  1. I am just glad I did it the right way all this time.
  2. Since a squire is supposed to be a training period I also agree that an older squire is a rarity. But this may change when becoming a knight becomes more expensive and is hard to do. Remember that even the great knight William Marshall only became a knight later in live. He did however command armies before that, so the position of knight was more ceremonial at that point. In my game most squires get a position of power within the household of a family member. Positions like steward/bailiff, reeve, huntsman, etc.So they end their training as squire.
  3. The Book of Knights and Ladies gives ideas for PKs from other regions. It also gives a list of the liege lords that go with it.
  4. I stand corrected. I used the 5.0 book indeed. Sorry about the confusion
  5. I see no problem. As you stated the two are far apart enough to have almost no confusion. On the other hand: Some confusion is not bad. It would only elavate the position of the younger Arthur when people think he did things the elder did. The shock of the elder Arthur could be devestating when the players think he is to be the real Arthur. You could as a GM state that this was not entirely planned, but you will see how it plays out. When the real Arthur appears they may be jumping on the bandwagon that much sooner.
  6. Page 119 of the rulebook explains the multiple opponent rules. It says: Up to three enemies may attack a single character on foot; only two may attack a single foe if all are mounted. I read also that you can do only one opponent damage. So even if you win both only one opponent gets the damage. (I never knew that. So it is good to reread the books sometimes. )
  7. Funny enough in my game the question 'who did it?' was never answered. I assume the PKs thought it was the Saxons and the rumours were clear, but they never thought to find out. So i had never needed to think about this. In my game Syagrius never really played a part so would not be my first choice. Seems also a bit grand I think. his revenge seems much more personal against Madoc, and maybe his father. Merlin could be the one. He may have had a vision on how things will play out in the future and set its course. The whole anarchy phase did set up the people to easily accept a new King. Centurion King. An unlikely candidate I think. He did not get any gains from it. I expected him to try and take Lindsey much sooner than in 503. That action seems more of a reaction to the sudden increase of power of Nanteleod. It could be fear of a too powerful Logres of course. But it seems a rather drastic measure and he did not use it against Nanteleod. Margawse and Lot. That could be, but I am not sure what they would get from it. Its not as if he had the power to step into the gap afterwards. I would have believed it if he gained more power in Logres because of it. It could be that he feared that King Uther gained to much power and wanted to split up Logres, but I do not know why he did not act against Nanteleod when he came to power. I also think that both the Centurion King and King Lot had respect for a strong man and leader. King Uther seemed to be that man, so I would think they respected him. Although I could believe that Margawse (and Elaine to King Nentres) poisoned the king's ear. So I would believe it more if Margawse was behind it than Lot. Morgan is a bit too young. she has a grudge against Uther sure enough, but that will play out later as she transfers her hatred to Arthur. The Butler. Well you will have to think of a reason why he would do such a thing.
  8. It looks nice. I noticed you have given each power its own land. so all the lands of Escavalon are together. But in that case you should divide Logres as well. There is no king and there are some strong lords: Duke Lindsey in the north and Duke Silchester in the south. The map of 495 gives the strongest political parties at that moment, although other powers have shifted the ones in Logres do not. So they are not unified front. In fact in 503 according to the GPC Malahaut and Escavalon fight over the spoils (being Duke Lindsey). Also Kent and Essex join together to take London. Not sure if Garloth is part of Lothian. The maps in the GPC say so, and the text says King Nentres is King Lot's right hand man. But 512 Nentres is present at the battle at the the Bassus river (and killed there) as an ally of Malahaut, but Lot is apparantly not present. He could be there on his liege's orders, but I am not sure.
  9. Too be honest The core rulebook is great book and holds so much information. It has so much: character generation (of course), but also information on foreign cultures, it has history of how it all came to be. It also gives an outline of the future (the rise and fall of Charlemagne). It even has some adventures in it. There is only one major drawback: I need to find time to play the system.
  10. That was me. The system was simple: Each spell is treated as a skill. Certain attack spells (like a magic dart or something) would then be just the same as shooting a bow or throwing a javelin. In the setting we used this method magic was dangerous, so had its drawbacks. One was that whether you succeed or fail you get some magical backlash (1d6, 2d6, or even 3d6 damage which heals after a good rest) . The damage was determined by the strength of a spell. Other drawbacks was that sometimes a failure did not mean that the spell failed, but acted in some unforseen and usually annoying way. For the healing it was a bit different: You took on the damage of the one you were healing. A good rest healed the damage taken. Luckily you did not get extra damage. Some magical locations gave you a modifier to your roll. Or the backlash was reduced. The magical strength of the location determined the size of the modifier. Otherwise treat them as skills, so you can earn checks and use training to increase them. Since we played a group where everyone had a magical ability we did not change the number of skill points that could be added, but you could do that if you wish to mix knights and magic users, so the magic users are not penalized on other skills for being a magic user. (Unless you do not mind that they lack in social skills.
  11. Just to put in my 2c: I use the following houserule: Instead of having a standard shield bonus on a partial success you need to succeed in a DEX roll (not modified) to gain the 6 point defense of a shield. This means that you will need a reasonable DEX score to get the bonus.
  12. One of the fun parts is that the system makes people try to take more use of stealth, wits, charm and social interaction. Taking on a knight in full armour is suicide.
  13. For me Faeries work different from the sense that they have no morality that defines good or evil as we humans do. So there are fae that destroy things. They can be seen as evil, but not to the other fae. They just are there. I had King Oberon explain it to the PKs as such: Although I would like to help destroying the Dark Hart (the nemesis of the PKs and an evil fae). This is not my power. You see I am the right hand and the Dark hart is the left hand. While his power is destruction, mine is creation. In other words I cannot destroy. For me the Seelie court are the fae that stand for summer, growth and life, while the Unseelie court are of winter, death and destruction. But the distinction is mostly a human one. For the fae such distinctions are strange. So a nice and benevolent fae may suddenly turn into a raving monsters killing everything in his path. An example is a redcap that the players had to deal with. It helped them out several times, but also left a trail of bodies to lead one of the PKs into trouble with Arawn, the King of Winter. In the end dealing with the Fae is dangerous and weird. For they place value on odd things.
  14. Funny enough I never used minitiature for a KAP game. Even thou I sometimes use them for other games systems. I think this has to do with the more individual combat of a knight. Each knight fighting his own foe. There is less ganging up on one target. In such an instance relative distances between combatants are not needed. Another reason is that it is less of a turn based game than other systems. You alrerady declared wwho you will attack and there is no option to switch opponents in a single combat round. So it will probably be unclear who killed the opponent as both strike hin at the same time.
  15. As mentioned by others. Traits and Passions are the core of the system imho. It creates the drama of the questing knight. When he has to balance his love for his lady with his loyalty for his lord. Or when his valor fails him when confronted with the giant threatening his home. They are also the anchor for a novice player. Knowing your character is honest will help you in defining the character and play it out.
×
×
  • Create New...