tenchi2a

Ok Seem weird that this book replaces BtoM (especially in early periods) when BotM seems to handle Single Manors a lot better. When you say smaller proportion, some of the Improvements (Dovercote) are not listed because they are considered Included in the estate and their income is already included. So if this needs to be reduced what would its income be? Not sure what you mean by space, I am not seeing any reference to it. It seems to have way to many unused space for a £10 manor for little or no gain. Ok

Ok, How do you use BotE in the early game with the knights just having one manor. A lot of the rules/sheets don't seem to work for just one manor. 1. Do starting Manors have all the included improvements listed for Estates? 2. Some Improvements (Stable) don't have rules for lands as small as £10. 3. Do you not use a sheet until the Manor is converted into an Estate? 4. If a Manor provides £20 (Customary Revenue + Production) why does the system still call it a £10 Manor?

Deleted

So I was wondering if the Knights get 50 or 200 Glory for becoming a vassal. The Book of Sires seems to imply that you get 200 but I can not fined this in the corebook. The corebook seem to state that you get 50 Glory for becoming a vassal. To the best of my knowledge Book of Sires is updated to 5.2.. So which is right. Book of Manors vs. Book of Estates Which do you uses and why. 1. Book of Manors 2. Book of Estates 3. Both

Is there any word on when the corebook will be available. because I am not a fan of Starter boxes. They tend to be extremely stripped down rules that are massively changed/errata when the corebook is released.

I have found that in most if not all games (This one included) Point buy systems lead to carbon-copy characters, as players go for the most optimized Attribute spread for the type of game being played (Combat/Social/Etc.). And while some players will make a character based on a concept, most will game the system. At least to me, the fun of a character is not having the prefect killing machine or super diplomat but having to work at what needs to be done, and sometimes failing. Thank for the Radom roll location. looks like it was updated a bit to insure characters where no more then 1 point below the minimums. Nice fix.

Why was the random attribute option removed in 5th edition? I am personally not a fan of point buy systems and prefer the random system. Was their a mechanical reason for the random system being removed or was it just due to preference and can you still effectively use the random system from 4th?

I reserve all opinions of the new Edition till full release. To many times in the past a error or misinterpretation of QS rules can lead to to many arguments about rules that don't exist or are just badly worded.

As the title states, I am looking for a conversion of No Mans Land to 7th edition and was wondering if anyone has done it. I know there are conversion rules in the corebook, but was see if it had been done already so I could save some time.

Being a knight is their job not their culture. The point was they come from a city dwelling urbanized British culture as you stated while they can become knights that was not their cultural identity. ""These are the Old Families of the “ancient aristocracy.” The urban Britons revere their Roman heritage, especially their legal system that has maintained the “peaceful imperial times"" These are not remnants of roman legionnaires, but as is stated aristocracy so the Law skill is a fine fit for them not a specialized combat skill. That was my point. first your %'s are way off as only the first 4 legions where raised in roman and tended to be kept as province defense and the other 10 where from client states so it would be more like 29% Roman citizens + 71% Italian Socii. And the citizen is one I have seen debated as what was truly considered a Roman citizen has always been in question. The point about "Latin Rights" is always the sticking point as even some "Roman citizen" did not always have "Latin Rights". That said, I was more describing The Roman Empire near the fall, as that would be the time that mattered to the KAP game.

Again I am not concerned with there combat skills. I am concerned with their non-combat skill which are the true mark of their cultural upbringing. you seem to be stuck on just one skill representing the whole package, while I agree that skill is an important skill the rest of the chart also factors in and you idea washes over that. Just in the British cultures there are major differences in skill distribution and those distributions also change depending on the time period. Doesn't need to be much difference to be different. You seem to have the administrative roman nobles the culture in the game represents confused with the roman legions. First the roman legions were a subculture of the roman society not the Romans at large, and for the most part outside their generals (Legatus legionis) were normal not roman citizens. The tended to be Socii or client state citizens who where indoctrinated into the roman legion culture, roman citizens did not normally if every join the legions. And as the roman empire had been in decline since 410 AD and collapsed in 476 AD roman culture in KAP is the remnants of the noble administration from the occupation that chose to stay or the British peoples that adopted the culture. So no the roman society in the game is not the roman legions it is the roman administrators, so the culture skill is fine. The roman culture that you are talking about would be the Byzantines in this game and I would say their cultural skill of "Tactics" fits the conquerors that you are portraying. I don't feel its a moot point as again I am more about the total culture balance of all skills not just one or two and thru out each of the cultures skills charts their are differences not just with one or two skills.

If that was the case I could see it, but as presented its not. The point here to me is that in the current system its up to the players to actively work to brake the stereotype. In the system you and Atgxtg are proposing all players are equal from a generic attribute to skill conversion even if they don't put any work into being different from the stereotype. Here I have to say I disagree as that is the point of the different cultures. Roman society at large puts more emphasis on Courtesy and Intrigue where Cymric society is more about the sword and spear. You are dealing with a Knight who has been brought up with his society norms, so of course he will be better with spear and the same goes for Roman society and Courtesy and Intrigue. to brake the mold one needs to active fight against the norms (Roleplaying and skill selection) not have it handed to them by the system.

Ok this we can agree on. I have never liked the Idea of Narrowly Defined Optional Skill especially when they have a tendency to be put in several books later after the need has faded or an optional rule has taken its place. As a example why have the Knife-throwing skill, there is a Dagger skill and a throwing skill why would you need a skill to combined these? I agree when it is warranted, but minimalism can be its own trap to. I think we all feel that way. One of the major issues I took with the Newer Mechwarrior game (A Time of War) outside of the need a spreadsheet character creation was the generic character it created due to the removal of faction specific. The first thing I see with the Idea presented here is the removal of the faction specific skill list as they would be replaced by, lets face it, a generic attribute to skill conversion so that culture no longer matters only attribute. First, this kills random attribute since no one is going to want to be skill crippled by a roll. Second, like all PC the players are going to find the optimum point spread to get the best skills and start cloning it, so all PCs will become carbon copies from then on. P.S. another of the system that got hit by the lets "balance and streamlining" it bug. But while they streamlined the mechanics they went overboard on the character creation somehow creating a at once more generic but also overly complex character creation system. That takes skill. I was using the mod in the book which where in +5 intervals and capping it at +10. As most non-combat skill tend to be much lower the combat skills I never found a problem with it. No issues keep having your opinions.

While I don't retract any of my former statements, I will say that I may have been to harsh do to my last few weeks on the Shadowrun forums and dealing with the complete gutting of the system in the name of "balance and streamlining". Making it the 3rd game I liked (Star Wars, Legend of the Five Rings) to be destroyed by companies trying to get new customers at the expense of old customers that have supported them through the thin years before RPG became main stream. So to come to another forums for a game I like and hear lets change the rules it will be better kind of is my "trigger word" right now. AS for gaming, I may not have the years you have but I have been gaming since the mid 80's, and have seen many rules that where suppose to enhances turn around and bite the writers on the @$$

All that said the most impotent contribution from APP and DEX are to the aging rules. If either of these hit 0 you die, so to me that alone makes them equal to the other stats IMHO. So if you want to have low APP and DEX risking earlier death, more power to you.