Jump to content

Call Me Deacon Blues

Regulars
  • Content Count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

15 Good

About Call Me Deacon Blues

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Incidentally, I stole the table from Paladin for my Pendragon game, and just treat Promotion as 1 step above their current station, i.e. Esquire to Household knight, to vassal with a gift manor, vassal with a grant manor, banneret with gift estate, banneret with grant estate, baron etc.
  2. Yes, they most certainly did. Evidence shows that women warriors date back to around the same time as men as warriors. But specifically referring to these cultures, I do recall that the Romans wrote quite a bit about Celtic warrior women. Now, the Romans were liars, to be clear, they made a lot of stuff up, especially about the cultures they were trying to demonize, I don't know about all the archaeologically evidence we may or may not have, but like... Pendragon takes place in a world where the HRB is an accurate retelling of historical events, I don't think it'd be that weird to take some of
  3. I believe David Larkins mentioned more rules for playing Ladies, and I think possibly Lady scenarios, in Knights and Ladies Adventurous. Maybe in his podcast, when they did that Cornwall game. I really only stayed around for character creation lol.
  4. Now, that's completely different. See, they were reading their modern values into ancient stories which we... shouldn't do? For some reason?
  5. For the record, I give out checks like candy. I have a slightly higher powered game than some, but it seems fine. I give checks on all crits, most fumbles, impressive successes, succeeding on a skill that doesn't come up a lot, like, say, Religion, etc.
  6. Me too. I'm not even interested in magician characters (not clear if that's in there or not anyway). I just want it lol
  7. I forgot to mention LGBT knights, but yeah, culturally it's no real problem. You get married to get heirs, or adopt. The Lover's Solo literally had a result on the table where the lady's husband turns out to be gay or asexual lol. Paladin has rules for gay civil partnerships consecrated by the church! Just add that in, and maybe make the subtext a little more textual so people realize that's what it is lol.
  8. I apologize for keeping going after the mod said to stop. According to the pm he sent me, I have apparently driven Atgxtg off of this forum lol. Anyways, I'm very excited about 6th edition. Even some of the changes I might not even really like. Because I'll be able to benefit from the new material and new ideas, and for anything I don't, it's not like the RPG police will break down my door and take my older edition books away from me. EDIT: I'm being told via pm that clearly chivalrous/religious traits and cultural attribute bonuses have been removed, even though none if the charact
  9. No, see, that's totally different. That was a change to the setting Greg made in order to appeal to players in his group that were uncomfortable playing something other than the default. Not the same thing at all, see? I'm very consistent in my thoughts on this game!
  10. The way I play it, noble children are either on the knightly track, lady/courtier track, or religious track. Earlier in the campaign, it's expected that men become knights and women ladies, but as it goes on, it becomes more accepted to go into either role. You can switch tracks partway through, like Constans did, but skills might suffer a bit, and generally most don't. Inheritance works as normal, except replace sons with knights and daughters with courtiers, religious children don't inherit at all.
  11. You're NOT LISTENING, this IS what Greg wanted! He wrote must of the damn thing, including this. I get it, you want Pendragon to be your safe space, but the facts don't care about your feelings.
  12. Hey, start reading page 52 of the 5.2 Core Rulebook, starting at the heading Non-Traditional Women. Read through to the end of page 55. There's even a picture of one on page 53. So. yeah. This is not a new development. This section even exists in the 5.0 book, page 41 through page 43, with a different picture of a woman knight on page 42. I could go on, but I don't really think I have to? It's already there. It's ALREADY part of the game, and you CAN'T say that Greg Stafford didn't want it there.
  13. Has anyone mentioned, knows and is willing to tell, or figured out some of the new derived stat formulas? Damage seems consistent with what it was before, though by that formula, the Courtier Knight should have a damage of 4d6, not 5d6. That might be a misprint though. I'm honestly kind of at a loss for the new movement rates. I've tried a few different formulas, none of them seem to work, and that's assuming it's still based on STR and DEX in some way, which I think IS the case, but I'm not sure how.
  14. I have a player who's interested in this option for his next character, and I'm not a huge fan of the rules as written. My tentative ruling is the same in regards to how the skills work, but you get 2 rolls, both made with a -5/+5 reflexive bonus; however, you don't have to split your skill to attack 2 targets (of course, more than 2 does require splitting). I also think it might be okay to fight with the defensive tactic on one weapon, but not the primary one. Haven't playtested this yet though, I'm really split as to whether or not this is just good enough to be a viable option, too punishin
  15. Praetor Jonathel is mentioned in gpc in 500, I believe. So presumably he became Praetor after St. Albans. Though I could be wrong, isn't a Praetor a Roman city authority? I think he's just in charge of Dorchester, though I could be wrong.
×
×
  • Create New...