SaxBasilisk

Having looked at this a little for my game - at least with regard to modeling period religion - I'm wondering whether a historic or mythic view of the saints would be best here. For example, St. George would be quite iconic for Pendragon, and he had already been martyred at the time... but he wasn't associated with chivalry, or the dragon, or England. Either way, I'd be interested in seeing it!

It's for outside the county itself, not outside Sarum. I think the fourth option would be a good starting point for determining internal defense, but I'm sure one's relations with neighbors (especially Silchester and Wessex) would also factor in.

I see where you're coming from. I do think I'm making the right call for the Countess in 496 in my GPC - she's still nervous about the events of the previous year. (Frankly, I didn't even know whether the group would let her take power until my most likely candidate leapt to her defense in the debate.) Still, I think she'll feel more comfortable about sending out some of her retinue in the future, once she becomes more secure in her position. And I'm glad I asked about the numbers here - because my PK marshal certainly did.

I interpret those knights as a perq of the position. Plus, giving the marshal the ability to order away a noble's personal bodyguards seems problematic, especially in Anarchy. Thank you! With that in mind, I'll revise as follows: Ride out recklessly from Sarum with those knights immediately available: Half Sarum garrison (4) + Knights with "other business" but in Sarum (7) + retinue for marshal (4)* + retinue for constable (2)* + PKs (5) = 22 knights Send out messengers and wait two days: Half Sarum garrison (4) + Knights with "other business" but in Sarum (7) + retinue for marshal (4)* + retinue for constable (2)* + PKs (5) + vassal knights from near manors (3) + patrol (5) = 30 knights Send out messengers and wait four days: Half Sarum garrison (4) + Knights with "other business" but in Sarum (7) + retinue for marshal (4)* + retinue for constable (2)* + PKs (5) + vassal knights from all manors (5) + patrol (5) = 32 knights Send out messengers, empty fortress garrisons, and wait four days: Sarum garrison (8) + Knights with "other business" but in Sarum (7) + retinue for marshal (4)* + retinue for constable (2)* + PKs (5) + vassal knights from all manors (5) + patrol (5) + half of other fortress garrisons (17) = 53 knights

I'm getting ready to run GPC 496, and one of the PKs is the marshal. He'll need to decide how to respond to the events of the year, and subsequent years, which means figuring out how many knights he can spare when riding out to battle outside Salisbury. I'd like to present him a few options, and I'd like to get people's opinions on the breakdown below. This is based on the 75-knight breakdown in the rulebook. Ride out recklessly from Sarum with those knights immediately available: Half Sarum garrison (4) + Knights with "other business" but in Sarum (7) + retinue for marshal (4)* + retinue for constable (2)* + PKs (5) = 22 knights Send out messengers and wait two days: Half Sarum garrison (4) + Knights with "other business" but in Sarum (7) + retinue for marshal (4)* + retinue for constable (2)* + PKs (5) + vassal knights from near manors (3) + one patrol (5) = 30 knights Send out messengers and wait four days: Half Sarum garrison (4) + Knights with "other business" but in Sarum (7) + retinue for marshal (4)* + retinue for constable (2)* + PKs (5) + vassal knights from all manors (5) + patrols (10) = 37 knights Send out messengers, leave halved garrison at fortresses, and wait four days: Half Sarum garrison (4) + Knights with "other business" but in Sarum (7) + retinue for marshal (4)* + retinue for constable (2)* + PKs (5) + vassal knights from all manors (5) + patrols (10) + half of other fortress garrisons (8) = 45 knights * I'm guessing on these figures, based on the 10 for "staff". What do you think about this breakdown? Would you use something else?

Welcome back to my irregular series on running the GPC, year by year. We've come to a year of skirmishes and listening to NPCs talk! Let's get started! This is one of the most underdeveloped GPC years in this period, so if you'd like to run a side adventure or spend some time working with your characters, this would be a good year to plan for it. First, it might be good to look over the Uther period timeline, to add another layer to the action. Uther chooses this year to go to Cornwall rather than to rescue Malahaut, which sets up a number of other story elements, including the marriages of Ygraine's daughters, the Supreme Collegium vote, etc., later on. GPC as written is a little unclear on what's going on here, so this might serve as a useful framework. The main incident this year is a scene straight out of Excalibur - and I can say I'm not fond of it. Greg suggests that setting this up like a battle at the beginning is a good idea, and I'd also intersperse some other actions that the PCs can take while the encounter is going on. Also, in a game in which the Duke of Cornwall only controls part of that region, "all the land from here to the sea" is an odd take. Fortunately, the exchange is relatively short. I usually try to expand upon the festivities that night. It might be a good chance to bring the characters face to face with a prominent Cornish knight - Brastias (if you've taken Book of Uther's suggestion to keep him Cornish), or Cador, who they can encounter at Terrabil or during Anarchy. The session rounds out with the skirmishes at Lindsey. Depending on how combat-intensive your group is, you might find the unmounted but numerous Saxons to be a serious challenge for the knights. It's certainly a good time to re-familiarize yourself with the skirmish rules, if they haven't come up lately. How did you run 489 AD in your Pendragon campaign?

I think a key change here would be handling Mark. He's present in the action by Anarchy, provides the default plot for people not going after the Grail during the quest, and is nearly a century old by the end of the campaign. It would seem that some re-arrangement of the timeline for Cornwall's rulers might be appropriate.

Everyone, For my game, I created my own Google Sheet for characters that can be customized for my own campaign and quirky rules set. One of my players has just consolidated and updated it. I'm curious to hear your thoughts on it, and what might potentially be changed: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1O6e2t_hJW9CXUbmO5AnGquqLtqsoZhIuYzUaNPSTMOM/edit?usp=sharing (One caveat - there's a drop-down for "Religion" that automatically calculates the religious bonuses, but I'd have to give editing permissions for people to activate it.)

Having examined that quote from my game notes, it is 100% pure vintage Wikipedia. But I did get beyond it, and I think I actually dipped into this work right here, before realizing that it was legitimate and I didn't actually need the research for the game: https://www.google.com/books/edition/Contes_populaires_préjugés_patois_prov/J-FiAAAAcAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0 Thanks! I hadn't thought of it that way. My read of the chapter was that the main drama was the Syagrius-Madoc conflict, with sympathies leaning toward Syagrius. If the praetor's mission leads to horrible slaughter, that might change the moral reading of that conflict. Maybe Madoc is right to plan to leave quickly, or (dropping the scene of eavesdropping on the council) maybe he's sickened by what he sees and that's why he decides to leave. Combining it with your first insight, however, I'm wondering how much it really matters how this invasion is played out. The only impact it really seems to have is providing the characters with some insight into how Madoc would be as king. Maybe that should be a focus of however the invasion is run. I think Cadwy would help - but that's based on my reading of what's going on between Uther and Cadwy. Back in 482, the Somerset invasion ended up in this weird stalemate settlement with Cadwy becoming both count and king. Uther's massive march through Somerset in 489 would be supported by a vassal, but would make an independent sovereign look weak. So both kings are in an odd spot. Dealing with the water leapers is a symbolic gesture that allows the march to occur. Uther can dismiss it as insignificant to his men, Cadwy can play it up as a good deal to his people, and the world spins on. I'm interested to hear what people think about this interpretation.

The next year in my irregular series is 488, in which our brave knights go to France (probably). This session may require more GM preparation than previous years. The characters will be essentially choosing between two different courses of action - accompanying Uther to Somerset, or joining Madoc's expedition to France. To be realistic, neither group I ran through this year decided to stay in Britain, but your mileage might be different. This means choosing between two scenarios, both of which will probably require some extra work on your part to create some additional material for both scenarios. If your planning time is at a premium, you might feel out which way the players lean beforehand. Those who've played through the water leapers scenario note that it can be quite deadly. One key factor here is whether the PKs are using their Boating skill, which is not exactly the most popular skill for training. Perhaps King Cadwy can provide some experienced boatsmen to help out? If the players go to France, it's good to consider their relationships with Madoc and Syagrius. Perhaps a scene or two early in the session can bring the characters' relationships to life? The GPC has some suggestions as to what adventures might be crafted. I'll add one, translated from a local folklore book: "One such Dame was known as La Dame d'Apringy who appeared in a ravine at the Rue Quentin at Bayeux in Normandy, where one must dance with her a few rounds to pass. Those who refused were thrown into the thistles and briar, while those who danced were not harmed." I put a long-disused postern gate into Bayeux leading off this ravine, and told the players of the story. They could lead some troops to the postern gate, so long as one of them was able to pass a Dancing roll. The first one who tried rolled a critical, then went mad during the assault and ran back to the ravine... This might not work for everyone, whether because you prefer less supernatural content during the Uther era or want to keep things more gritty and serious. This session is a good one for considering what you want the tone of your Uther period to be. EDIT: This year also ties to two adventures in the section at the end of the Uther period, "The Mercenary Syagrius" and "The Presumptuous Praetor," in which Syagrius returns to Britain. Some GMs, preferring to be more faithful to the history of the real-life Syagrius, might choose to pass over these. EDIT: Also, Book of Uther establishes that Syagrius is not a praetor, but a king. Apparently some people care about this sort of thing, so I'll put it here. For those who've run this year of the GPC - how was your 488?

I've done searches online for explanations of past Pendragon rulings on the differences between these two, and I'm quite confused, seeing different answers in different places. (The change from 6 Libra to 10 Libra manor income didn't help.) Assuming a standard 10 Libra manor, what would be the annual discretionary funds deriving from it be, based on whether it were demesne or enfeoffed?

As with Morien - although I have been making exceptions for weddings of the royal family and the like, as I assume people come far and wide for those. It does tend to lead to awkward situations sometimes if you're using the cards... It's probably also bad form if a PK's spouse doesn't attend their marriage feast, allowing everyone to properly watch one of the happy couple fumble a Flirting roll with the other.

Thanks!

I could have sworn I saw stats for Ulfius in one of the official books, but I've been looking through Sires, Uther, Warlord, and the additional character PDF for GPC, and I can't find them right now. I could make up my own, but I think I used them the last time the players interacted, and I'd like to be consistent. Any ideas?

This looks like fun! Some thoughts: Item 3: I think some battles are deadlier than others - and in a lot of them, it seems the "died" and "died with great Glory" ranges are about the same. I'm not sure how you model that. Item 6: Is Flirting appropriate for childbirth? Maybe this should just be a straight d20 roll. Item 7: Given the lower number of skills, would it be better to reduce the skill points allocated? There are some unusual results on the tables, like getting lost in a storm with Gorlois, that might bear some thought about how to model.

Here's some information. I don't know how finished this is - perhaps someone else can weigh in?

Happy new year, everyone! I'm wondering who might be on the table in terms of marriages for the Countess and Jenna during Anarchy. There's a suggestion that the PCs might be appropriate - but I'd like to get a better sense of the NPCs out there to know how appropriate that is. The countess turns down Mark, and there's no followup suggesting Jenna would be appropriate. (I suppose this would sabotage a famous story later on anyway.) Ulfius? I seem to recall reading somewhere that he's just not interested. Perhaps his son Uffo is a prospect, although that could be problematic around 520. Nanteleod or Alain? This does commit the characters overwhelmingly to Escavalon's cause. Cynric? Maybe... this will certainly make the later Anarchy and Boy King period interesting. There's a couple other local nobles floating around, like Praetor Jonathel of Dorset. I doubt anyone would want to commit themselves to one side or another of the Clarence/Gloucester feud. Greg's decision to lower the number of counts leaves some oddities, like Earl Tegfan of Jagent (GPC), and the Countess of Marlborough and her underage son (Warlord). I suppose there are also some lesser barons floating around who might be potential marriage material. What have you tried or considered?

Thank you for the very thorough response! It sounds as if I'm on the right track regarding the importance of the Saxons. I can add a couple thoughts to this, based on some material hidden in the Book of the Warlord and Lordly Domains. We have a couple of things going on with Ulfius. First, according to the Book of the Warlord, early on he makes a land grab for the territories in northeast Salisbury that aren't directly part of the Countess' holdings. Second, Lordly Domains establishes that the Countess of Rydychan is Ulfius' sister-in-law, and frames the Rydychan matter as something on which Ulfius requests their help. This gives some additional ways to work Ulfius into the situation - maybe he foregoes the land grab if Salisbury puts its resources into helping out his family. As for Somerset - in BotW, practically every hundred Salisbury took from them ends up with some sort of supernatural invasion during Anarchy. Most notably is Wereside, the lord of which has the right to smelt the bog iron on Salisbury Plain. A renegade knight builds a castle there, which is later attacked by goblins. That gives two or three different points at which the players could get involved, depending upon the timing. With regard to the unauthorized border fortress, we could have another couple of complicating factors. The location of the PK vassal manors could be crucial - for example, Broughton ends up right on the border with Wessex. Also, in BotW, the major fortress that's there, DuPlain, ends up captured by Wessex, so having a second one in the area might not be horrible. It appears my players will have plenty of tough choices to make. Thanks again!

Let's go for a little thread necromancy here. I'm having trouble with this myself in my prep for Anarchy. It seems that the most likely that trouble comes from Wessex, and possibly from Sussex, assuming that Salisbury's relationship with Silchester has deteriorated enough that Ulfius just lets his ally through. Atgxtg points out that Wessex could let other kings' warriors through to raid - but this would probably vary based upon how Cerdic is getting along with his fellow Saxons. Some of the material I'm looking at is contradictory (big surprise), but it appears that he doesn't get along with Port until 507, and I'm not certain about the others. Cerdic might not be inclined to let warriors of other tribes wander across his land for raids, especially if it's more profitable to just ask Salisbury for more protection money. With that in mind, it really seems to me that it's less important what the nebulous "Grudge score" is like for many of these kingdoms, and more how Salisbury is faring with both Wessex and Silchester. I think you could have the same overall effects in terms of finances, but it changes how players approach the situation. Thoughts?

According to the Caradoc romance, Caradoc the elder was a king from Vannes. There doesn't seem to be a lot of overlap between him and the BoU Caradoc, but feel free to steal it if it helps.

My irregular series on running GPC now arrives at the year 487 - sort of. Let's get started! This year begins at the Great Sword Feast - the Christmas Court for 486. Given that the Christmas Court for 486 is described in the previous year with no note of this, you might want to think about how to handle this situation. In my campaign, the Christmas Court usually ends up sandwiched between the main action and the winter phase, so not much happens at that time. Those who spend more time on Christmas Court might want to consider how to arrange the events. Most of this follows a script, in which Uther does something beneficial for others for perhaps the only time in GPC. If you'd like to make him more sympathetic, this would be a good time to play him up. Then Merlin shows up with Excalibur. If the PKs didn't follow along with him or failed in their task the previous year, the GPC is unclear on how exactly he got the sword. Maybe there's another group of knights that helped him achieve it, thereby potentially setting up a rivalry for future years. Next, the PKs are (in the default) given a choice of activities: going on an embassy to Lindsey, or with Madoc on naval raids. I'd make sure that any who go on the naval raids are later told about what occurred when Lindsey saw the sword, as that foreshadows the interaction with Gorlois in two years. Also, you might want to consider what Merlin would say about the "High History of Excalibur" - it's not necessary, but it might help to drive home the significance of the PK's actions. This is also a good time to think about one - and possibly two - characters. The first is Lady Ellen. You might keep an eye out for opportunities to incorporate her into play, perhaps at Christmas court or feasts, so she's more of a known quantity in 495. The other is Sir Argan, the king's constable and "fixer" from Book of Uther, who reappears again in 493 according to the BoU chronology. If you do want to play up the events of that year, building him in as a potential individual the PCs might run into at court might be worth it.

Even if you're mostly improvising, the Book of Uther might be useful as a source of inspiration. It lays out the various court offices, provides different personalities you can steal if needed, gives a lengthy example of how the king's court and progress might work and who might come along, and even has a section of charts for courtly adventures.

My sloppy way of handling these problems in my game: 1) In KAP as written, half the offspring are unable to become knights. I simply have players make the same roll as for gender - but an unsuitable child can be unsuitable for multiple reasons. Sometimes it is sexism on the part of the family, but it can also be due to small size or an inappropriate temperament. Those who are unsuitable can work in various jobs for the family, or get married off. The only part that I still wonder about is how to handle the "third for prayer" allocation of the traditionally male heirs, as it seems as if a non-combatant could be easily put in this position and free up another possible knight. It's not a huge deal, though, as you'd need at least four children already to make it happen. 2) The eldest male child inherits, except if the knight designates another child as an appropriate heir. This can create drama within the family, but I'm not opposed to that. 3) Given that the Pendragon default is to make sessions cover a year, I've found it most convenient to handwave when pregnancy occurs for female knights. I mean, there's nothing that says that birth has to occur in the winter, right? I also jettison the dangers of pregnancy for PKs, as I think the life of a knight is dangerous enough. 4) For LGBTQ knights, adoption is an option - but I want it to be balanced with the uncertainty that is a part of the generational game. My solution has been to make "proper" adoption expensive by stipulating a cost and a roll to succeed (maybe Courtesy or Law for Roman knights). I started some research on Roman laws and procedures regarding adoption, but I think I only tried this for one session before the PK in question was critted and died. Does this work? Pretty much. Is there a better way? Probably.

Skill checks: I tend to give PKs a skill check any time a success advances the action. It gives the characters incentives to try out different things and engage with the setting in different ways. (And I want to say that's how Greg played it; if it's not true, someone will correct me.) I've used the "Your Own Land" solo a lot with the PKs, with everyone going through the same stages at once. Now that we've had some household knights and officers entering the game, I bring in Vassal Service as well. It goes quickly - and the court cases in the first one usually end up being hilarious. I might add on an additional one if a PK is particularly set on it. In addition to Morien's comments, you might check out The Book of the Entourage for various types of commoners with whom the PKs might interact. Creating one is often as simple as assigning a Key Skill appropriate to the profession. If people want to interact more with a character, you might add a notable trait, and then add on details from there to fit. There's no point in pouring a lot of effort into each of what will become a rapidly expanding cast of characters.

One other change to the quickstart Passion rules I noticed that I don't think has been addressed yet: criticals do not automatically increase the invoked Passion by 1. I think this is welcome, as otherwise PKs with Passions over 20 become ridiculous quite quickly.