Tizun Thane

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

BTW, my itnet was to foreshadow the Adventure of the Knight of the Griffon, from the GPC, and I wonder if my players will put it all together when it happens. 

Good Idea!

4 hours ago, Adaras said:

Well I wouldnt say it should be something like a normal thing but like a product of an epic quest. 

Yes, of course. I can imagine some game when suddenly, it became a possibility

To be honest, I am not sure about the idea itself. It sounds a little too much high fantasy for KAP. A little too much D&D to my taste.

IMHO, the KAP Campaign should be grounded in reality. Not full of knights riding griffons to battle like in Warhammer Battle. Maybe it's juste me.

10 hours ago, Morien said:

In that case, ignore the two barons and just have the Praetor ruling Dorset, as in 4e and implied in GPC.

You could say there is 2 barons in 480 and one praetor in 500. After 495, everything became possible.

Otherwise, you could say the two barons are bannerets of the Praetor of the time. A banneret is much more manageable than a count (Praetor).

12 hours ago, redmoongoddess said:

I prefer to use County Nobles in this era since IMHO I feel the alternative can become too complicated for players who don't enjoy the politics part of Pendragon.

Did someone play with with the scattered holdings? Honest question.

According to the Book of Estate, you have in 485

• Sir Kynon, Baron of Meadowstream (Dorsette)
• Sir Tegwared, Baron of WeirstreamT (Dorsette)

In 531, you have the Praetor (duke) Jonathel of Dorsette. It could be his father too.

6 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Maybe an opposed roll of sorts. Ideally any sort of "temptation" on a quest would be opposed by some virtue or passion. But as written the adventure is easier for most Christians than for most Pagans. 

I would play it as written, but for a pagan character, I would allow a religion (pagan) roll to help him understand that if he gives up to to the fertility ritual, it's fine, but he will miss the higher mysteries of Epona, with some spiritual roll for example.

26 minutes ago, Morien said:

Even better, rather than making the Failure = Out of Story,

It's part of the genre and understandable, considering the circonstances. Otherwise, they never learn the consequences.

46 minutes ago, Luca Cherstich said:

.but I was wondering whether this can be used also fro Christian knights making solemn vows to perform a certain duty.

To be honest, in my game, if a knight makes a solemn vow to perform a certain duty, he can inspire himself under honor. He gains glory according to the task, nothing more, nothing less.

13 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Unlike many other RPGs Pendragon doesn't come out and tell you what sort of characters are needed for any given adventure, and adventures are not "balanced" in the classic RPG sense (i.e. rigged).

Exactly. You can fail and it's OK. It's a very old school design.

13 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

when I ran White Horse, one of my players was upset because the trait tests involved were very difficult for a pagan character to pass. He griped that "The adventure is designed  so that I'll fail." I replied "No, it's just not designed so that you will succeed. They are not the same thing."

There is one issue with this specific adventure however. It's a mystical test for Epona's worshippers, but a pagan character will likely fail. It's a bit contradictory.

16 hours ago, Morien said:

Morgan Le Fey's Challenge can be a good one to run on relatively new players, too.

It's a very good adventure to launch a campaign. Love it, and the Challenge itself is nasty ^^

Otherwhise, The Spectre King or Blood and Lust are full of good adventures for beginners. I especially love the Adventure of the Castle of Tears myself.

10 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I've generally failed back on a mix of early siege rules (Nobles Book/Lordly Domains),

You find this rules  in the Boy King as well. It's what I use if I must.

10 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

the battle rules from the Book of Battle (Assault a position, etc.),

Good idea!

On 11/20/2019 at 3:11 PM, jeffjerwin said:

This tree will be extended into the Arthurian period in future books (that I worked on).

 

Do you still work on this future Book about Britanny ? It looks very promising.

On 8/27/2020 at 8:52 PM, Aeden K said:

Since a couple of years, we started a table of Pendragon, i knew only by name, but not really play it, but love at first sight can happen !

You could buy the Oriflam Edition in french, if you can find it. It's the translation of the 3th and 4th editions, and it's 99 % compatible. (Surtout les scénarios et les suppléments régionaux, jamais réédités).

BoArmies has some flaws, but is not ridiculous.

The main problem is the Saxons themselves. Their list, even the "beginners list", is tough. Their army is the most dangerous. They hit hard, very hard. They are skilled, even if they fight on foot. They are supposed to be scary. It's not a bug, it's a feature.

On 8/15/2020 at 7:50 PM, SaxBasilisk said:

At the same time, I don't want a game in which all the PKs spend most of their improvement points from character creation to the start of aging raising the same three skills just so they can survive against BoA units. I'd prefer a game in which a PK works on their combat skills, but can also pursue becoming a Religious or Chivalric knight, or poetry, or politics. With the deadliness of Pendragon, there's a risk in neglecting combat ability - but I'd find it unsatisfying if players felt the risk was so great that they shouldn't improve anything else.

There is no time for poetry during Uther's reign (and worst, during the Anarchy). If you want to be a romantic knight during Uther's time, even a chivalric or religious knight, the setting should be against you. This is the dark Ages, before the Dawn of Arthur's reign.

Of course, your players could maximize compose if they want, and even gain glory by this way. But it's a challenge. If they achieve anything, they can be proud.

So, basically, it's logical the Saxon Army is deadly, because they are supposed to be deadly. Look at the other armies, and you will see they are much more manageable.

13 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

That shouldn't be a problem. With the way experience and training work, as well as the benefits associated with any of the religious or chivalry bonuses, PKs have a lot of incentive to work on those other areas. It's just that:

1) Early on, the knights will probably focus on getting their combat skills up to the level of most knights, and will probably push for a 20 both to always get their shield and to eliminate the chance of fumbling.

My players are often rushing to their precious "sword 20" as well, precisely for this reason.

On 8/14/2020 at 3:45 PM, Voord 99 said:

But for Pendragon purposes, Glory should be an equalizer — a sufficiently glorious knight “sits at the high table at every court except Camelot.”  I’m using Tizun Thane’s suggestion of flipping the mechanical role of Glory and APP, so that Glory affects seating and APP determines number of cards.  But alternatively, if one prefers to stick closer to the Book of Feasts, APP could be the equalizer.  At any rate, there should be a roll that allows you to move up (or on a fumble, down), even if Russell would be very cross with us.

I am honored, dear Sir

I was thinking like you about social status during a long time. But I thought the rules are written with the assumption that the PKs are minors vassal knights, at the the court of their count.

You could deal with status with bonus/malus at the first roll. A baron should have a +5, a count +10, duke +15 and a king automatically seated at the high table.

Furthermore, at the court of the high king (Arthur/Uther), you may apply a malus of a -5 for vassal knights because it's much more difficult to shine with some so much noble people to seat.

On 8/22/2020 at 5:28 PM, SaxBasilisk said:

You might also check out the "Riding the Rounds" adventure on page 67 - not "Riding Patrol," as it says in the text - and the "Sample Peasant Problems" on the margin of the same page.

I was never a big fan of the "Adventure of the sword" as written. It's awesome to be the one to find Excalibur, but it's poorly written and "easy" (even if the monsters are tough and a PK can be killed with one bad roll).

It's a good idea to mix this encounter with a few more mundanes ones during the patrol. Some brigands,  some minors (but funny!) encounters with peasants, with a chance for a few rolls and roleplaying.

The true adventure will be hidden. So, when a weird peasant asks for his goat, PKs won't be thinking "Oh, it's the adventure!" but "Oh no, another peasant with his pesky problem we don't care". And they will be surprised by a giant with 3 eyes. 🤣

I think you will always find a player to be kind enough to search for the goat (Genuinely or for a check in merciful). And if they don't bite the bait, let them continue their patrol and go on. KAP is about choices.

7 hours ago, Voord 99 said:

1) The new seneschal’s problem.  A friend of the player knights has just been made seneschal of their liege, and he’s still learning the ropes.   (He was rewarded for his loyalty, or as a favor to his family, or something, rather than being exceptionally well-qualified for the position.)  He’s in a panic, and he asks the PKs for their advice.  The mayor of London is going to be a guest at a feast to which a number of members of the titled nobility have also been invited, and the new seneschal has heard that the mayor of London, as representative of the king, is treated as being of the highest rank and outranking these barons.

 

Very funny, but shouldn't it be the new chamberlain's problem? Honest question. I am not sure myself.

Otherwise, this is good, but IMO, only in arthurian times. During the reign of Uther, I don't see a mayor treated with such esteem.

The others tidbits are good, if you like protocol.

Many people mixed the Adventure of the Bear of Imber with the Battle of Mearcred Creek for a nice first year.n

In this post, we talked about this Adventure , and I presented a nice little adventure of my own.

On 7/30/2020 at 7:35 AM, Atgxtg said:

the encounter tables come to mind.

Yes, but for the record, don't buy the The Pendragon Campaign First Edition, just for this. The encounter tables (and the very good advice from G. Stafford) were reprinted in Blood And Lust in 3e edition, which is much more useful. A true gem.

23 hours ago, Hzark10 said:

For example, in Marion Bradley Zimmer's Mist of Avalon, he notes that Gueneviere is the least likeable version he has encountered, but is his favorite interpretation of Modred.

Yes, I love when Greg Stafford speaks a bit about him. BUT. For the record, you confused two different books. The "best" Mordred, according to Stafford, came from The Once and Future King. The exact quote about Mists of Avalon is:

Quote

Women retell their real parts in the Arthurian cycle. Queen Igraine, Queen Margawse, mostly the priestess Morgan le Fay, but also the least likable Guenever I ave encountered in literature. Also portrayed is my favorite interpretation of Morgan le Fay.

I partially agree by the way. True about Guenever, less true about Morgan. I hated this book from day one. With the recent polemics surrounding MZ Bradley, I understood much more better my own feelings.

21 hours ago, Voord 99 said:

1) The GM (that is, me) assigns the player’s “correct” (or default) place based on their social rank and the setting.  A minor baron will be expected to be at high table in most times and places, but not at a huge royal feast attended by all of the great nobles of the realm.  For most PKs, this is Below the Salt, except in small unimportant feasts, where they may “correctly” be Near the Salt.   

To integrate the status in the seating rules, you could give a bonus/malus, considering the size of the feast and the status of the knight.

For example, a vassal knight may have a -5 malus at a huge royal feast (he is basically a nobody), no malus at the court of his count, and a +5 bonus at the feast of an another vassal knight.

21 hours ago, Voord 99 said:

In the Uther period, the winner, if a knight, must have won at least 1 of their Geniality points through being Indulgent, Valorous, Reckless, or Proud.  This does not apply to ladies.

For the ladies, you could have Chaste, modest, sober, and the like, to reflect the views of the ideal lady of the times (ie meek).

21 hours ago, Voord 99 said:

Before 514, the most notable guest receives only 5xGeniality.  It is not until Guinevere arrives on the scene that courtly manners displayed in social settings are valued highly enough for people to care all that much about who came off best at a feast.

In my houserules, only the winner gains genialityx5, if he beats the threshold as well. The others gains their geniality in glory. The official rules are too much generous to my taste (You win more glory with a feast that you gain glory from a tournament).

If I remember correctly, the official name of the queen of Sorestan is Gunnhild (Knights Adventurous).

On 7/22/2020 at 8:37 AM, Morien said:

look forward to hearing how it went!

So am I!

1 hour ago, KungFuFenris said:

The Franks were lead by Ragnachar

They were lead by Ragnachar, or Clovis?

By the way, did you decide to keep apart the historical Clovis with the mythical Claudas, or to fusion the two of them?

1 hour ago, KungFuFenris said:

I built my own Army List to act as the Frankish forces, filled with Longhaired Warriors, Merovingian bastards, Roman-trained Riperian Franks and the infamous Angon javelins, barbed and heavy. It was pretty grand.

I never have the bravery to make my own army list. Bravo!

7 minutes ago, KungFuFenris said:

We're getting close to 495.

Glad to know!

It's always useful to write down your own campaign. You can reread it years after to remember the tiny details. Useful to have new ideas.

Did I mention I like your campaign?

I would love to read about waht happens next ^^

I played the cambrian war last week. It was awesome!

I was afraid it was too much book-keeping, and not enough roleplaying. But, in play, it worked very well. The trick is to give everyone something to do, I believe. I had a bit of diplomacy with the tribal kings and the like, and it was great.

The players win the war in two years (!), building the castle during this period. I played the battles with the Book of battles, with no predetermined result.

They played a few years before both the adventure of the dolorous wyrm (good friends with the king Caradoc of Ergyng) and the adventure of the red blade, reinstauring "Pig-Boy" (renamed Adelin) as king of Merionnyd. So, they were able to build a strong alliance against Powys. They invaded Powys with a big army of 960 KV. The battle was fierce, but they managed to get an opportunity against king Belinan himself. They killed him with one stroke, poor man.

At this point, half the PK were dead or dying, but they won the battle that way.

On 2/3/2020 at 5:57 PM, Atgxtg said:

But there is no precedent for such a thing.

 In fact, there is.

To sue a count, even a king must follow rules, especially the king Arthur (Just 26). So, the king could summon his court of justice to judge the case (composed of anothers counts and barons and the like), with a delay of forty days. I studied enough medieval law to know it's not a crazy idea.