Tizun Thane

No. I am doing the same, for obvious reasons.

Yes, it's useful. But many actions with dex suffer a -10 penalty when you are in heavy armor. So many PKs try do avoid them. Tai is the best. Then Con. Then For. Then Dex. Then App. Don't tell your players

In case you don't know, the Rydychan Brothers Adventure is (vastly) expanded in Lordly Domains, in a full 3 years scenario. It's written for the third edition, but it's still useful.

I would repeat myself. I do not use the new concept of feodality presented in Book of the Warlord/Estate. It's a mess. It's hard to explain to my players. It's not fun for me. It's heavily based of William the conqueror new feodality, and I don't think it's fitting for KAP. Instead, I use a much more easy model of feodality to handle (the old one, by the way). It's a very easy to understand pyramidal structure of oaths : The King The high lords (Barons, counts, dukes, whatever). They hold directly or indirectly their fiefdom in the name of the king A few bannerets by county, powerful vassals of the high lord. A bit more humble vassal knights Bachelors knights, who serve rich lords and bannerets (even rich vassal knights) Squires and Esquires. They serve Of course, I do not exclude the possibility of a knight not being a vassal of the nominal count, because of specific reasons (lands granted by the king or another powerful lord, the church, whatever). However, I use the new gestion rules, much more playable in game. IMHO, do not bother with this new feodality mess. You will win an headache for nothing. Yes. For example, when the count robert will be knighted, and being a "true" count, he will win: 1000 glory points to be a knight 200 for being a vassal knight 200 for being an estate holder 200 for being a baron 200 for being a count XXX glory for being the son of Count Roderick (1/10e of the glory)

To be fair, I was always a bit puzzled that you have to decline to go to a pagan blessing to achieve a pagan quest. It's a bit contradictory to my taste. BUT... you could argue that it was some kind of higher mysteries you could discover. As a GM, I would let the PK roll [religion paganism] or [spiritual] to understand the hidden truth. It was the gaming style as well in Old School D&D. The Grognard community lament of this change of paradigm with the 3.X edition.

"game balance" is a plague, even for d&d. 🤣 Did he have the same frustration in real life? Maybe he just don't like to lose.

Yeah. Before that, it was a rich and peaceful land ruled by the wise holy kings of the Grail. To be honest, I don't think it's a good idea to be so close to Listenesse. The more you know, the less mystery there is. I am afraid it will "kill" all the magic of the Grail. Furthermore, the Lancashire is outside of the kingdom of Logres. Your campaign would be out of reach of all the wars, and torments of 90% of the GPC.

C'est pas faux. It's strangely faithful to the sources, in its own way. There is even a weird reference to the Skavens (because why not). A must see if you can speak french.

There is some déjà vu. You answered the wrong post, Atgxtg . Otherwise, Morgan already hates the PK because she was banished because of him.

My PKs manage to get the mad character back, from the clutches of Morgan, no less. So they are very happy of course, and they have a new plan. The madman is now in their custody. Their new plan is to confront him with his beloved wife (love 18 more or less). They hope the shock will help him to regain his sanity. The mad PK became crazy after a failed loyalty (Arthur) by the way. I don't know exactly how to handle the whole situation. Any thoughts?

My rules for glory. They are working well in my campaign. For a quest, it's usually 100 glory pts for each knight to complete. You save a village from an eternal winter, you save save the beautiful countess from an evil something, etc... I can adjust the glory if the quest is trivial, or super-heroic. For combat: 5 pts for an angry peasant (or an hungry wolf by the way) 10 pts for a brigand or a soldier 20 pts for a pict warrior or an experimented soldier 25 pts for a saxon warrior, or a sergeant 100 pts for a berserker or a saxon chief For a defeated knight, the glory awards are: 50 pts for an ordinary knight (less than 2000 glory points) 75 pts for an notable knight (Beetween 2000 and 3999 glory points) 100 pts for a famous knight (beetween 4000 and 7999 glory points) 250 pts for a extraordinary knight (beetween 8000 and 15999 glory points) 500 pts for a legendary knight (16.000 glory points or more) The legendary knights are very powerful, Lancelot, Gawaine, and the like.

It's my feeling too...

If I remember correctly, in the book of armies, it is said that the (little) giants of the army of Lucius ignore the height modifier as well. So Tai 25 seems to be the threshold. I saw it as well in some books, so it's a bit of official...

To be honest, I never bothered with hundreds and the like, and I am very happy. I use the new 10£ manor system of the Book of Estate Rules without it. My Salisbury is simpler. The count, a few powerful bannerets (Devizes, Du Plain, etc.), a bit more of minors vassals knights with their little manor, and the rest in bachelors knights. It's easier to understand that way, and it's more faithful to my vision of the arthurian feodality. The Book of the Warlord is inspired by the english feodality after the norman conquest. My vision is closer to french feodality, with powerful vassals of the king.

Maybe the new wife will be greedy, and plot to kill Jenna to make room for her own children... Or Jenna will be the heiress and future countess. You could adapt the Rydychan usurpers campaign to Salisbury too. Good Stuff. Otherwise, I forgot what lands countess Elain owns. What happens to them? Many good questions!