Tizun Thane

I like your map. Brittany is accurate by the way. Maybe you could color Leon and Cornouaille in purple like Corwall, to show their allegeance. Otherwiste, there is no need for a specific county of Rennes, or Nantes. the kingdom of Vannetais is enough, and works just fine. With France, I am a bit surprised. Why didn't you make Burgundy a part of the kingdom? Same thing with Languedoc or Provence. You mention Auvergne or County of Toulouse, which is good, so maybe you should mention the duchy of Normandy, the counties of Flanders or Champagne, the big names. Otherwise, it's a wise move not to bother with the merovingian kingdoms (Austrasia, etc.). The frontiers change all the time. Edit: By the way, Anglia and Caercolun are joined into an unique duchy (Anglia). Hartland became Hertford after Uther's reign? Is it canon in the GPC ?

Maybe Bayeux was not loyal to Claudas in the first place

You convinced me. It's dramatically appropriate, and good foreshadowing of things to come. Besides, it's a good "hero" to fight against. Yes, that's the downside. Attack vs. two became boring after a while.

Yeah, or even an embassy just before the battle of Bayeux.

The Syagrius mess... In the GPC, it's heavily implied that Syagrius was deceived. He thought it was a war of (re)conquest, and it was just heavily raiding for loot from Uther's part. I like the dilemna between honor and loyalty to the lord. I also like the suggestion there is some kind of agreement between Uther/Madoc and Syagrius, when they "give" him to Claudas to meet his fate. By the way, there is two stories told in the GPC, confused in one: In the Vulgate, king Uther (with the help of king Ban of Benoic and his brother king Bors the Eldest) ravaged the whole kingdom of Claudas, which became "the lande déserte" or "Land Laid Waste" after that . the historical Syagrius "the last roman", who was conquerred by the historical Clovis, a famous Frank king, and the first "french" king. The mess came, IMHO, from the confusion beetween the mythical Claudas, and the historical Clovis. I dislike this choice, but it deserves its own thread.

Once they understood this tactic, and have a good leader (battle 20+), PKs became very effective in battle. A little too much... The GPC depicts the results of battle, if players don't have huge influence over it. But it's a guideline, not a bible. In my campaign, for example, the king Lot was killed (by a a young PK, no less) during the battle of Bedregraine. I feel the Tournament Period is effective. There are very few battles in the GPC, and my PKs are hungry for more battles (and glory and loot of course). And by the way, I loved the Wine adventure too. Back to the topic, my players befriended Dodinas le Sauvage and his best "bro" Sagremore. Dodinas, a RTK, is also the son of the king of Sugales, aka Belinan. So I am wondering how Dodinas will react when his lord go to war against his father. Take a side? Go neutral?

Thanks both of you! Lucky you. Of course, i'm interested. Do you mean Brycheiniog, Ystrad Tiwy, Cardigan ? My players are friends with the kingdom of Merionnyd (!), so I suppose they will try a new alliance against Sugales. I will definitively do that. Guerilla warfare is very difficult to portray, especially in Pendragon. I use the old 5d6 damage for the longbow, and it's working just fine. Your campaign inspired me (the marriage, the minor quest, etc.). Antonio looks especially fun to play

I just love the Cambrian War scenario described in the Savage Moutains. Did someone play it? I think I will play it during the 540' (to remplace the King-napping of Arthur), and I hesitate to play it as written (with lots of abstract book keeping) or give more life to each tribe king, etc. Any advices?

Oh yeah! I agree. Anarchy especially is awesome, and the best part of the GPC. But. But. I saw so many promising campaigns when players lost interest during the Anarchy (after Uther's reign), without seeing Arthur. It's so sad. If you want to play knights in shining armor, you can begin with Arthur, not Uther. I saw in recent posts some people trying to insert moderns (progressives) ideals into their KAP game under Uther's reign, because they were respecting the timeline. If you want to do that (which I found a bit strange, but hey, it's your game!), do it with Arthur, not Uther.

It could be interesting that the ambush was not from Levcomagus, but from a third nefarious fellow trying to add fuel to the fire. accidentally? 😀

It can be useful from a narrative perspective. Your PKs can stumble upon a friend's or foe's manor everywhere. But otherwise, it doesn't serve any purpose in my game.

It could be a good adventure! But it's a bit difficult to "force" love on characters, for a non-descript "lady of the launds". You have to make her alive and attractive to players to make the adventure works.

It's the old question of internal versus external honor. The rules are murky. In my game, honor is internal, so it does not matter if someone else watches it or not. In my opinion, you never lose honor for cutting wood. A squire can do that without shaming himself, and so a knight can do it, in case of dire need. To understand what labor is, you have to understand the 3 orders of a medieval society. 1) Clergy. They pray 2) Nobles. They fight 3) Commoners. They work. They have no honor. They count their coppers. If you behave like one, it's logical you lose honor. "Some commoners, I suppose, are good people, but..." It's -5 in my game (And I felt it was RAW). I think it's logical. If you are doing commoner's work, you are not a noble, but a commoner. Go with your filthy friends, and leave us in good company! Honor is very different from courtesy, and chivalry. Killing a desarmed knight? Bad, but understandable (-1 en honor). Raping a noble lady (-2 honor)? Disgusting, but alas, things happen during war... Killing a foe with a sword? What a man! Killing a foe with a crossbow? What a coward (-3 honor)! As you can see, honor is a very primitive Code of honor for a knight. No in my opinion. What you think is not really important. It's about society expectations. Even peasants will lose any respect they have for the knight.

They probably all died. After 518, Hampshire became the personal estate of Arthur. In my campaign, Derfel became Corneus grandson and Bedivere/Lucan became little brothers of the unnamed Derfel's father. During the 530', it became a barony.

The beginning of the campaign especially. The first years... It doesn't appear in Malory. The only source is in Perlesvaus (from the famous Anonymous). Loholt slayed the giant. He felt magically asleep just after (some kind of "post-berserker" magical sleep). Kay came and killed by treachery the brave Loholt in his sleep. It was no accident of course.