Tizun Thane

20 hours ago, Morien said:

On 2/6/2022 at 1:24 PM, The Wanderer said:

When count Robert is knighted, do the PKs have to pay the value of their main manor (that is, £10) or the value of all of their holdings (for example if one PK has 5 manors he will pay £50 😱)??

All the manors they hold from Robert. If they hold 5 manors of £10 each, yes, this means £50.

And if they are very Loyal (16+), especially if they are also Famously Generous, they might even pitch in from their other manors.

I've never been  so mean to my players 😀 I usually consider that their peasants who directly pay this kind of taxes.

back in the days, I wrote some little adventures, to be used "en route" during any travel. I thought I could share this one with the community.  As I am not a native english speaker, feel free to correct any mistake.

***

The Adventure of the Two Giants

(from Erec and Enide, circa 4300 to 4581)

Situation :

A road, skirting a forest, preferably adventurous.

Problem :

As the PKs walk past a forest, [awareness] they hear a woman's crying coming from inside the woods.

[Faerie Lore] successful: It could be a washerwoman fairy, whose tears are an omen of death. You had better not go and see.

Those who decide to go their way win a cross as coward if they want to avoid a bad omen or lazy if not.

If they go to the origin of the noises, the PK discover a sweet maiden displaying all the marks of a deep sorrow: crying, begging God to tear her soul away from her body, scratching her face with her fingernails and tearing herself off the hair.

A roll of courtesy (or romance) will be needed to calm her down.

"Lord, there is no wonder that I am full of sorrow : I would like to be dead, I have lost the pleasure and the taste for life, since my lover was taken prisoner by two giants and cruel felons, his mortal enemies. I'm afraid they'll kill him in the most despicable way. "

Deciding to save this stranger is worth a check at the player's choice in Reckless, Merciful or Just.

Solutions :

Defeat the two giants, who will fight to the death.

Tracking their trail is easy (hunting roll at +5). The two giants, whips in their hands and club on their belts, amuse themselves by whipping a naked man tied hand and foot to a nag. The man cries out in pitiful pain, and his blood flows to the stomach of the horse.

If challenged, the Giants will be surprisingly courteous. If asked, they could explain that his father killed their father. Therefore, they have the right and the duty to avenge their father. They want to keep their prisonner alive and torture him for years, you know, for fun.

Characters :

-        Aimée, profile of Lady with Amor (Cadoc) 18.

-        Cadoc de Tabriol, notable knight with Honor 16, Amor (Aimée) at 17.

-        Castor and Pollux, two little giants (with club and whip at 15), surprisingly courteous.

Glory:

-        normal for combat (100 per Giant).

-        100 glory points to share for saving Cadoc.

19 hours ago, AlHazred said:

Die schlafende Schöne (The Sleeping Beauty): From The Trodox - Ars Arcana, issue #37. As might be expected from the title, this is based on the story "Sleeping Beauty" from the Brothers Grimm, but there's a couple of twists. I have a few issues. I'll put them behind spoilers for people who haven't read it. Other than the quibbles I have below, I think this is a decent scenario, and works really well as a solo, perhaps for a knight who is still unwed after the rest of the party has started their families.

I totally agree with you.

@Voord 99 Not really. It's really a sleeping beauty character, under a curse.

1 hour ago, AlHazred said:

It's a good scenario, but difficult to implement prior to AD 531. I'm trying to figure out if it can be done with Uther.

Sure, it is written for the year 531. The kingdom is in peace, and that's why the "saxon" raiding is a mystery.

But, it could be adapted during Uther's reign. After all, the Saxons are active during this time. Maybe some knight from Levcomagus is behind the raiding? Or maybe some traitor from Salisbury, as in the original scenario? We can replace the attacking brigands with Saxons, trying to avenge their hanged friends.

My german is rusty, but I will try anyway.  Thank you for the links.

19 hours ago, AlHazred said:

Saw this post in another thread, and thought I'd put it here. I've got a friend with a bunch of Casus Belli magazines, and he was kind enough to photocopy the "Premières Armes," "Anciens Mystères," and "La Chasse au Blanc Cerf" scenarios for me.

Casus Belli was a professionnal magazine whereas Tatou was more of a fanzine (uneven). Don't waste your time on Anciens Mystères. It looks like a D&d or a Warhammer Scenario. A solid 3/10.

"Premières Armes" and "La Chasse au Blanc Cerf" are hidden gems. If you have translation troubles, let me know. The language is beautiful, but quite poetic in french. It can be tricky to translate.

I trust you both. English is not my native language. To me, someone with candor is a trusting person, but I could be wrong.

16 hours ago, The Wanderer said:

I have another question regarding the Feasts: I find all the sitting preferance based on APP a bit weird... shouldn't it be based on Glory? I mean... a knight with 8000 glory and APP 5... is he going to (almost invariably) be seated below the salt?

Indeed, it's a bit weird. We have an old topic about houseruling the Book of Feasts somewhere on this forum 😀

5 hours ago, Morien said:

There is a very nice adventure illustrating how such an interaction could be GMed (outside the BoF system): the Adventure of the Werewolf in The Spectre King (3e) and the Tales of Spectre Kings (4.5e reprinting with the Grand Tourney switched out for the White Horror) books.

It's based on the Bisclavret lay, an old tale of Marie de France. I played it with the Book of Feasts, and it was a blast 😍

57 minutes ago, creativehum said:

Im not sure I've ever seen "Trusting" listed as a Christian Virtue -- I mean, in real life... not in KAP. 

Sure it is ^^ It's called candor. An article about candor as a christian virtue in the Jane Austen novels

https://brendascox.wordpress.com/2018/02/01/jane-austen-faith-word-candour-and-jane-bennet/

1 hour ago, creativehum said:

think the simple baseline for tests here, in my view, "Would the situation at hand, for a reasonable person, provoke the need for more information or trigger suspicion?" Because, remember, the Traits are there for temperaments of impulse in place of rational thought. (Pendragon famously has no Intelligence stat!)

True, but the grey area is even better. If your enemy invites you to peace talks by giving you his word as a guarantee, is it stupid to believe in his good faith? Maybe, maybe not. Trusting/Suspicious.

3 hours ago, Oleksandr said:

Question, corebook say knights can mobilise their peasants for defence

I never used levée (what's the name in english?) in my game. Peasants are not dragonfooder. They don't want to fight, they don't know how to fight, they have bad moral, and will run away easily.

I don't use Berroc Saxons either. Sorry 😢

My house rules would be something like:

• Pay 1 £ in donations.
• check religion, or love (God or Virgin Mary or whatever)
• roll for spiritual/wordly, chaste/luxurious, sober/indulgent, modest/proud
• Glory: none.

On 12/23/2021 at 5:20 PM, creativehum said:

And I say, "How can this be a Moral Test. I'm not checking to see if I can interact with something. I'd be checking to see if I can avoid something. That's a standard test." (Let's assume for the moment I'm not trying to be a dick. Let's assume I'm genuinely confused about how you are applying the rules... because I am!)

And I answer: this is a magical night. Just roll the dice, please. I am the GM.

And it's a perfectly fine answer. You don't interpret the scene the same way I do. You think it's a standard moral test (like some mundane situation), when I think it's a magical test by Epona (or God, or whatever) during a magical night. The players know it's stupid to lose time with some pretty girls. If I let them do as they wish, there is no challenge.

If some siren was trying to lure the PKs to their doom with a song, it would be the same. Some magical compulsion.

3 hours ago, creativehum said:

Per the rules, if you Crit a Trait test (whether as required by a Famous Trait, or if rolled by choice by the player), you act strongly in accordance with the Trait you rolled. But that doesn't contradict or complicate what I wrote in my summary post, so I must be missing your meaning.

No, we agree 😉. I you crit, you must act strongly according in accordance with the trait. If you fumble, with the opposite trait.

2 hours ago, creativehum said:

If Morgan Le Fey conjures an illusion to disguise herself and seduce a knight, there might be a test of Chaste/Lust

If it's some illusion, what you call the standard test apply. The Player can roll, but can still choose how he will react, even against the roll.

However, if Morgan is manipulating the lust emotion (like some wicked succubus 😍), the player must act according to the roll.

2 hours ago, creativehum said:

can see the way you interpret the fertility festival. The Knight wishes to pass by the festival to continue on with the race to the White Horse. But the road itself is not magical but mundane, so I don't see that path as a magical test that must be passed. The knights are trying to avoid the festival, which in the simplest reading of the rules makes it a standard Opposed Trait test.

IMHO, it looks mundane (as far as a ritual orgy can look mundane), but it's not. Like during the Grail's quest. Many things looked mundane, but nothing was mundane. Everything was a magical test. If some beggar asks for some food, it looks mundane, but it's not. It's a divine test (or magical, but it the same thing).

2 hours ago, creativehum said:

Further, applying the Moral Test rules this way opens up the use of them for most situations and tests involving magic (the way you seem to be using them) and I fear in a world rich in magical events the knights would be robbed of the chance to have an impulse to participate or not. 

Yeah,that's the risk. My rule of thumb is : "is there an obvious choice to this moral dilemma for the player (not the character)?"
If the answer is yes, I ask for a roll after the players gave me their intents (ie "we ignore the fertility ritual, because we must continue our journey).

If the answer is no,  I let the standard test rule apply, and Players are not robbed of their freedom.

16 hours ago, creativehum said:

l;dr: 
Per the rules:

• Standard Trait Test = Which way does the Knight act?
  • Only Need to Roll if Famous Trait; choose otherwise
• Moral Test = Can the Knight do the thing/get the thing he or she wants to do/wants to get?
  • Either you have the value or you don't succeed or you need to roll unopposed to succeed, Famous or not; this is not about choice, it is about being worthy at this moment, so the out of only having

Or if you critted one way or another, even for a standard trait test.  The rules are messy, but that's the way to play it, sure.

Except, in this case, I always felt it was not a standard trait test, but a magical moral test. It was said "it's a magical night", and if you encounter a red stag, it's because the night is magical. The fertility ritual is not different IMO. In my eyes, it was a magical test. To be chaste (to have a higher purpose) and energetic, be a good warrior and horseman. Love your horse. Every step was a test.

You thought differently and that's fine.

On 12/20/2021 at 1:10 AM, creativehum said:

I was kind of loose with a lot of the "race to the ceremony" rules. For example, they all decided to join the hunt for the Red Stag, and because they did that in such a cool manner, I said they still had time to get to the ceremony.

You were a nice GM, too be sure ^^ Which one gained the blessing?

On 12/9/2021 at 5:08 PM, creativehum said:

The situation at hand has no text to suggest the fertility festival is magical — which is what the section on Moral Tests hangs on. So… I’m not sure what the confusion is here. “Are you good enough to pick up this sword?” Is not what is happening here.

I always felt the pagan ceremony was magical, on the contrary. The goddess Rhiannon is testing their dedication to the cause.

On 11/30/2021 at 2:39 PM, JonL said:

Morgan (along with Mordred) has an entirely legitimate personal beef with the Pendragons. It starts with Uther betraying and killing her father Gorlois to take her mother Ingraine for his own. Imagine being a child when the king's army comes to your home town and lays siege to it, kills your father, and then ships you off to a nunnery so that he can get to banging your mom without any distractions. Eventually she gets married off to Urien one of the lords who helped Uther destroy her family. That she even gives her half-brother half-a-chance down the line is miraculous.

Then Gwenevere mean-girls Morgan out of court over the latter cheating on Urien. They bad-mouth her as a wicked sorceress while Merlin does the King's dirty work left and right. Of course it turns out that Gwen was a cheater too and Arthur drowned a literal boatload of children in an attempt to murder her nephew (Wait, Arthur & Margause? 😞 😞 😞 ).

That's my take on Morgan, very close from Excalibur, the movie. From her point of view, Arthur is a puppet of Merlin, the wicked puppetmaster, son of the devil, etc., and she is only a free spirit.

31 minutes ago, Oleksandr said:

modern historical consensus

You have to be careful with modern historical consensus. The modern historical consensus is that the king Arthur never existed in the first place 😆

So, yes, there is a big exageration about the numbers. For epicness. And I think it's a good thing.

In the community, there is basically two tendencies:

• - the historical approach (like your way), trying to be faithful to the 5/6th century,
• - the mythical approach, trying to be faithful to the myth of the king Arthur, with all his knights and ladies,

As I said, there was no king Arthur in real history, no round Table, no Merlin, no knights in shining armor, no fair lady under some curse. And yet, it is what KAP is all about IMO.
 

1 hour ago, Oleksandr said:

Though you are right, for lone dagger +1 or +2 seems more appropriate, but i think sword+dagger should provide +4.

Keep the rules simple. A +2 with a dagger, why not, but a +4 is too much.

From a designer's perspective, the sword+shield should be the best defensive combo for a knight.

I use intrigue in my game like the "sense motive" skill from D&D. Suspicious is just a trait. It's not because you are paranoïd that you are right about it.

16 hours ago, Voord 99 said:

The way I look at it is is, RPGs often tend to reward people who are on their guard and suspicious, and cross every i and dot every t to prepare for the inevitable twist in the story, which is very often a heel turn by a friendly NPC, and it can be hard for players to switch off those ingrained reflexes.  It’s important to get players out of that mindset.  They need to go to the castle and sleep in that bed!

Very good point. I always try to use trustful as an advantage, most of the time, to balance this mentality.

On 9/13/2021 at 2:45 PM, merlyn said:

I've read that in the "Suite de Merlin", Malory's source, the shipwreck where all the babies except Mordred drown is a ship that's bringing the babies *to* Arthur's court.  We'll never know whether Malory deliberately changed his source material or just summed it up in a potentially confusing way.)

I never played the May babies slaughter in my campaign, for the reasons you mentionned. Arthur looks like some tyrant. But I never had the chance to read the "Suite Merlin". If it is some some kind of shipwreck... very interesting indeed.

I understood it was a joke, but I did not get it. Your explanation is very clear. Thank you.

1 hour ago, Voord 99 said:

t should absolutely 100% not be imposed on Geoffrey of Monmouth as a historical understanding of Geoffrey of Monmouth — he never calls Arthur that

It is true, but Arthur was a king who had kings as vassals. So, I understand how the concept of "high king" was applied to Arthur.

On 9/12/2021 at 4:14 PM, Voord 99 said:

The Anarchy.  It’s one of the most iconic things about King Arthur Pendragon, the game.  It’s the time when the training wheels go off the knights, and they have real agency for the first time — and in a way that they’re not going to have again after this phase is over.  Everyone loves it.

And it is almost entirely Mr. Stafford’s invention.

The Anarchy is probably the best choice of the GPC. It's the best way to show Arthur as a savior when he finally comes. The land needs a king.

Your alternatives are good, if you want to surprise your players who already know the GPC. For a rerun for example.

On 9/13/2021 at 1:13 PM, Voord 99 said:

I don’t think we should impose what appears to be the essentially modern concept of a “High King of Britain” on Geoffrey — speaking as someone from Ireland, I resent very strongly this act of cultural appropriation

From my french eyes, Ireland is not a part of Britain. Where is exactly the cultural appropriation, from your irish perspective? Honest question. I just want to understand.

On 8/21/2021 at 2:46 PM, Voord 99 said:

Even using BoB2, I don’t find the MW information particularly useful.

During big battles, it's only useful if your players are going to extended rounds.

During skirmishes, for minor foes (robbers, footmen, wolves), a MW is enough to win. For tough opponents (saxons, knights, monsters), I use the complete rules. But of course, as a GM, I use my wits to decide as well. Even a brave knight won't risk his life for some trifle matter, etc.
Of course, I don't care if some random NPC lost one attribute point. Except, for big names or personal rivals.

13 hours ago, Mugen said:

That's not a distinction available to me, as I'd play in French in which "dame" is a translation of "lady".

Calling a woman "sir" sounds like an insult to me, implying she's not behaving properly for her sex.

Same. It doesn't work in french. I use "dame" in both cases in french, and it works just fine ^^

On 9/27/2021 at 9:04 PM, piersb said:

OPTION FIVE

App can be rolled as Inspiration-ish for social skills. Success is +5/+10 for a crit, Failure is the reverse

It's my houserule, so I can attest it's not game-breaking. I limited the fake inspiration under App to one by social event (feast, whatever), and it works.

On 9/28/2021 at 1:40 PM, Voord 99 said:

Also, I’m a big fan of the “spotlight rule” that was posted on the old Nocturnal forums. Roll APP (modified by Glory) to have a chance to use a courtly skill or otherwise get someone’s attention.  It can easily be bolted onto the courtly challenges from the Marriage of Count Roderick — in a courtly setting, all knights get to roll APP, and in return they have a courtly challenge of their choice.  (They will naturally pick their best courtly skill, of course.)  But I use this a lot in general in social settings, and highly recommend it.  The Glory modifier gives it a nice rhythm in which APP is really important for young knights whom nobody knows, giving them opportunities that they would never have had otherwise, and bringing them to the attention of the powerful.

Love it. I am going to steal it for my game ^^

On 9/28/2021 at 1:40 PM, Voord 99 said:

Tizun Thane suggested making the card draw in BoF dependent on APP, not Glory, and I do that.

I am honored. This houserule works.

On 9/28/2021 at 10:15 PM, Baba said:

b) place 50 points freely between all attributes, with no attribute lower than 5 or higher than 18. Points you put in APP counts double. Then:

I use a slightly different rule. 10 in App, 50 points freely between all other attributes. Each point invested in App counts double.

I was tired of Quasimodo Knights in my game ^^

18 hours ago, piersb said:

The way 6e is approaching this is very similar to the way I'm approaching it in my home game.

There were no women knights in the world at the start of the campaign; there is one now; as time moves on it will be seen to become unremarkable.

I tjhink it's the best way to handle the matter. To link the rise of female knights with the rise of Arthur and his progressive ideals.