Jump to content

Call Me Deacon Blues

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Call Me Deacon Blues

  1. Yeah, if you've got 4th edition, I wouldn't worry about getting 5th. The only changes in 5th, 5.1, and 5.2 are artwork and editing and a few-odd rules clarifications/updates. I actually prefer Book of Knights and Ladies for character creation, but they are planning on doing a new version of it, Knights and Ladies Adventurous, for 6th edition so i wouldn't worry about it unless you can get it in a sale/bundle, or you really want rules for foreign knights because the new one isn't going to include those rules last i heard.
  2. Does anyone know who has rights to these adventures? Chaosium or whoever does French publishing, or even somehow the authors? I would love them to get an English translation if at all possible.
  3. Also, don't forget that either one of them would need weeks of chrirurgury, so even without fudging things or foul play, either one could easily still die of infection along the way. Especially Gorlois, who really does need to die here in my opinion.
  4. Probably are knights of the Count, maybe a few of the richer vassals as well. Keep in mind that the family ha served the county for around 4 generations, these families are precisely where he'd draw from for knights. BoKL also has a tale to roll for lord that I use sometimes also. Household knights, as the name implies, loud in the household of their lord. They definitely get some free time of course, to adventure and visit family, and since Roderick has a lot manors, he probably has men checking up on them pretty much all of the time, even when he's not there, so they would be spread out across his holdings, not just always by his side.
  5. Well, the Count would spend a bit of time there, when he's out on progress. Probably has a household knight or two that stay there pretty much all the time. Certainly at least some guards and servants, even when not in use
  6. So, generally speaking, any family knight would be a household knight, unless decided otherwise. Most knights are household knights, relatively few vassals. Honestly, I'd either make the players themselves household knights, or if you're using the Book of Knights and Ladies, you can roll for it, which is my preferred method (I actually use a very slightly different system based on the one from BoKL, which I could share if anyone wanted it). To actually answer your question about wealth, if they're a household knight, they'd basically be Ordinary all the time, maybe poor during leaner years, especially if their lord isn't like, one of the powerful barons like Count Salisbury. If they're a vassal knight, it depends on their land's worth, a single 10 libra manor would keep them at Ordinary, 30 libra in lands would make them rich, etc. Mercenary knights would probably hover around poor and ordinary, depending on if there are wars to be hired in, and how successful those wars are.
  7. Yeah, I think it's traditional for a Lord to give his knights gifts, and to get gifts from them in return, and it all kind of cancels itself out, generally. There was a year in GPC where Uther gives everyone more lavish gifts than usual, I believe, that might be a good indicator of things. I could see value in a chart showing the kinds of things that would be given as gifts, but have no mechanical benefits, and maybe an option on the chart for rolling on better tables. Since I generally try and keep all the dice either d20s or d6s when dealing with Pendragon, maybe have the first table be normal items, but on a 20, roll on the next table, and same on the next table, getting progressively better. Then, maybe due to yearly actions or Glory or something, you might get bonuses on the table. Something like that.
  8. Well, when I do this, I don't give them the option for point buy instead, so in this case I sort of am forcing them to roll randomly.
  9. Dunno if this is helpful, I use a hybrid method, we roll randomly, but if they roll really poorly, I'll give them the difference between what they rolled and 60 in points to spend. They will have less in raw points than the ones who lucked out and got super high, but they have more control over where those points go and can therefore spend them more wisely. In my current game, my sister only had like, 56 points after she rolled, and my friend had like, 65, but that was because he rolled a really high APP, she was able to invest in SIZ, STR, and CON and is the best at combat by a pretty wide margin.
  10. Ah, I see. Sorry for the confusion there, I guess that would be appropriate by that definition, but the GPC never refers to her as such. I typically reserve Dame for female knights only, and I might be wrong but that's the only way I can remember the term being used in supplements.
  11. I don't really have an answer to your questions, as I'm currently playing the only non-solo Pendragon campaign I've ever ran (by which I meant me as the GM and one player, not just me, though with certain tools I think that would be workable), and we're not quite to the Anarchy yet. That, and the war with Lancelot, and possibly the crowning of Arthur, are the only big points that I think could really lead to major disagreements, though I am likely forgetting at least some of them. I will ask if by Dame Elaine, you mean Countess Ellen? As far as I remember, the only Elaine mentioned in the GPC is the middle daughter of Ygraine and Gorlois, and anyway neither one of them are knights. I think the core book might waffle on whether or not female knights are referred to be "dame" or not (I think it had some other meaning at some point? Don't rightly remember), but I don't think that would be the appropriate terminology. I could be wrong on this, though.
  12. Maybe they're planning a late-phase sourcebook? Not really sure what, if any, long-term Paladin plans there are. As for the question at hand, there are absolutely things to steal from Paladin, but everything is flavored very differently. There is a slightly different family events table, generally a better one, but it also doesn't really have an option for "nothing," or "rumors," which... bothers me a bit. I've sort of lazily cobbled together a combo of the tables though, so it's doable. The solos are very much flavored towards Paladin, but there's a couple neat things in there.
  13. So, this is probably not helpful, but here's how I deal with clothes/gems: Basically, a knight is always able to maintain their clothes at their expected standard of living (so I don't bother checking for degradation most times), with Ordinary clothes costing 1 L, Rich 3, Superlative 5, and Spectacular 7. You don't get a bonus for wearing the clothes you're expected to wear, so if you want to get a bonus, you have to spend extra, with a cost of 1 L per APP bonus; most of the knights in my group right now are ordinary, so they'd have to spend 2 L to get a +1 bonus, but one is a Banneret now, and is Rich, so has to spend at least 4 to get a +1 bonus. You can supplement this with jewelry and other finery, but not only is there a threshold, they only add half their value to APP. So basically, an Ordinary Knight would have to have finery equal to 4L to get a +1 bonus; Rich, 8L in finery, etc. The combined total for their clothes and jewels is capped at their APP, so an average or ugly knight can still only get to a certain level. Now, this does meant that it costs richer knights more money to get bonuses, but I feel like it all kinda works out in the wash, because they have more money to spend on stuff like this. Plus, I include a free set of clothing equal to what their maintenance was this year, as well, so if a Knight who is normally supposed to be Ordinary decided to live as Rich, he automatically gets a set of Rich clothes costing 3 Libra, giving him a +2 bonus, and the Rich knight living as Superlative gets the same bonus, but it's much more likely he has extra money to spend on maintenance than the ordinary knight, since he can cover the difference right from his discretionary fund, while the Ordinary knight needs to have at least gotten 2 extra Libra somewhere or other.
  14. Yeah, basically Book of the Manor has been replaced by Book of the Estate, and it's got family survival tables in it too, so I do recommend it, but you can get by without it if you only have money to get 2. I really enjoy Book of Battle 2, and find it an improvement over the first one. You didn't mention if you have Book of the Entourage, if not, it's pretty good for rules on marriage, wives, squires, and some detail on servants, though a lot of the servant stuff is also presented in Book of the Estate. Books of Warlord and Uther kind of go hand in hand with Estate, there's a lot of good info in them, but unless you're wanting to run the extra 5 years that Book of Uther adds to the GPC timeline, I wouldn't think of them as priorities. Book of Sires is amazing for generating family histories, which is my jam, and possibly my favorite book out of the lot of them, aside from GPC. Book of Feasts is fun, and it's pretty cheap too, if that helps. Book of Knights and Ladies is getting an update soon, but we don't really no how long that will be; as much as I enjoy BoKaL, I'm looking forward to it. Armies has no update, it works just fine with BoB2, and while I'd like to see a revision on it at some point, I don't think it should be a high priority.
  15. Okay, good to know, let me clarify some of my questions. First off, where does the widow physically live? Like, let's say, the knight had 1 manor, 10 Libra, he dies, therefore wife gets 3.5 (which is what Entourage says to round to, though 1/3 of a libra isn't actually that hard to break up). There is also an adult son, he would inherit the manor, but 3.5 of it is the widow's. So he does get to inherit, but he only gets access to 6.5 L of the manor's wealth, with the additional going to his mother. Does she live in the manor house with him? A separate house on the land? Somewhere else entirely? It seems odd to me for her to live in a different house than the manor, especially since she's still contributing somewhat towards the knight, because she still owes a servitium debitum on 1/3 of a knight (my understanding would be that her 1/3 and the son's 2/3 combined would contribute to the knight in question, in this case, the son himself). And if that's the case, the son would only be getting 6.5 Discretionary fund? The way I figured it worked, while the Widow's Portion was technically hers, if she died and had no father to return to, then her liege took her in, and then basically helped him self to her fund, so long as he kept her up. Maybe I have totally the wrong idea here. I already talked over this specific instance on the Discord, I believe; she was an heiress, the PK earned more lands besides, her children are all also his children so no weird stepchildren exceptions, hers and his oldest son will inherit the land and the PK will administer it until the child reaches the age of majority, in which case her lands will be inherited by their son, and he will keep his own lands until he dies, in which case they will also go to his eldest son. I know things might get weird if the eldest child dies, and when, and whether or not he had any children beforehand, but like, he's 10 right now, so that's gonna be a bit.
  16. I have a somewhat-related question, because I'm a bit unclear on it; is the widow's portion 1/3 of the husband's landholdings at the time of marriage, or throughout the knight's life? I was under the impression it was the former, but wanted to make sure. And while living off the Widow's Portion, whoever is her warden (such as liege or whoever he assigns) or husband, would be who actually gets the income, right? Would it be normal for the widowed mother to live with her adult son, if she had no husband, effectively allowing him to keep the income? I just wanted to be very clear, because a PK's wife did die suddenly, and now we're wanting to make sure we understand how this whole situation worked. To be more on topic, there is a family survival table in Book of the Estate that has different tables you roll each year depending on their age. That's the way I deal with NPC's lifespans. It also has some allowances for other forms of death, such as plague, siege, etc.
  17. Eh, I never had that much trouble with Family Characteristic, since you roll that last anyway, no one was particularly able to build their characters around it, except one guy who had already decided on wanting to be good at Falconry, and then got that as his Family Characteristic by coincidence. One of the characters got the one for Singing, and even though their Singing skill is pretty decent, they always fail at it lol. Now, it might be an issue by the time of their heirs, haven't gotten to that point yet.
  18. Honestly, I do play with the cultural skills, and that's not been my experience. In my current game, only 1 Cymric character is particularly specializing in Spear Expertise. Hell, one of them IS using a Great Axe. I might be misremembering, and I'm not b7y by book, but I thought the Roman Law skill wasn't Courtesy and Intrigue, but Courtesy, Religion, and Folklore. Could be wrong there, but if not, to be a schemer they'd have to advance 2 skills, same as a Cymric knight. Either way, if you don't want to use them, you could just as easily split them into their component skills and not raise them as one, and it wouldn't change TOO much. Just be more It would only be an issue for the few cultural skills that aren't just combos of existing skills, and even then it's not insurmountable; like, For the Huns' Pony Defense skill, which is a combo of Horsemanship and the ability to defend yourself, just let them keep Pony Defense and separate out Horsemanship. Maybe a line in the new book, assuming cultural skills are still used, outright stating that you can do this, in case it's not clear.
  19. I thought about glory, but was trying to somewhat mitigate the issue of higher glory leading to even more glory, though I know that's at least somewhat intended by the system.
  20. I don't remember if this is an official interpretation, or just something I did to adjudicate ties, but I went with whoever is sitting in the higher position, and then if they tie, highest App, and then if THEY tie, App roll.
  21. With mine earlier, Player 1 got Hatred (Saxons) 8, Hate (Vortigern) 18, as well as Suspicious (British Christianity) 3, Suspicious (Vortigern) 1, and Cowardly (Big Fires) 2. It's not clear who they were inherited from, though I could probably suss it out from checking the years. Player 2 currently has a Hatred (Saxons) 21, and I remember he did inherit a greater value from his father, but I don't think it was 21 to start with. I'm not sure if that's mathematically possible. It was high though.Also Hatred (Vortigern) 16, Suspicious (British Christianity) 3, and Suspicious (Vortigern) 3 Player 3 marked down who he got what from and when; got Suspicious (Roman Christianity) 6 in 447 from Grandfather, Suspicious Vortigern 2 in 455, and Hate (Saxons) 19 in 463... Somehow she also has a suspicious (Berroc Saxons) 6, and I've barely dealt with them in my campaign so I assume it must have come from this though.
  22. Now, I wasn't completely by the book on all of my characters, because 2 of them had already established that their fathers died on the Knight of Long Knives, which by the book is impossible. I also used a variation on the Father's class tables from Book of Knights and Ladies to determine the actual class of the father and Grandfather, and a couple of them were Esquires; I'll make note of that and put in what they would have gotten had they been knighted. Player 1, Salisbury grandfather: don't have birth year written down, but was knighted in 430 so presumably 409, and he died in 439 in the Battle of Carlion. 1680 Glory Player 1, Salisbury Father: player also didn't write down his father's birth year; annoying, but he was knighted in 451, so presumably 430.. Not sure if that's technically possible according to the book, but oh well. Died gloriously in Battle of Snowdon in 468. He also failed to write his father's ending Glory, but his starting glory was 504, so presumable 5040, though when I add it myself I got 5220. So... Yeah, I should probably not have let my players record this stuff on their own. Player 2, Estregales grandfather: 409-440, died of Illness. He was an esquire, so had 490 Glory, were he a knight by the book he would have had 1490 Player 2 father, player kept super bad records of his father. He was 28 when he died, and I think he took part in the March of Aurelious Ambrosius to explain how they got to Salisbury. His Glory was 1602, though he was also an esquire, so would have had 2602 were he knighted. Player 3, Salisbury grandfather: 409-448, died of illness, 1952 Glory Player 3, Salisbury father: 440-463, died in Night of Long Knives (this was a character choice, not something that can actually be obtained in the book), had 1242 Glory, but was an Esquire so would have had 2442 otherwise.
  23. Thanks dude. If I had time to correct some typos and maybe update some or all of it to the Sires format, would you want me to?
  24. I'm not connected to this in any way, but I would also be super interested in getting a copy of that, if you're willing. I'm not in a place where I would want to try running this, but as someone who would be absolutely into a Book of Sires 2 (Sires Harder?), Book of Aurelius, Book of Vortigern, etc., I'd love to see what you've got; my email is REDACTED
  25. When I do NPCs, I usually just have a running spreadsheet with a couple very quick personality traits/stats (sometimes filled out more as they go on, unless they are already statted up somewhere else), and I'll just update it whenever they have an encounter with a short line or two ("490: sat next to Sir So-and-So at a feast"). I I also use that when making Recognize rolls, if they have never actually met a person, they have -10 to Recognize (normally, someone might not allow them to roll at all, but I figure with Glory bonuses adding to that, you might be able to Recognize them by reputation alone), have only been at the same event but had no personal encounters -5, also -5 if they have not seen each other for several years, or something major happened to them physically, like losing an eye, gaining a scar, hair going white, etc. I honestly don't try that hard to develop tons of characters beyond backdrop though, generally only a few characters really end up standing out. My players almost always have a huge love of Sir Elad, though since he's also the designated babysitter that's probably understandable. I had one group get really close to Sir Madoc, but my current campaign's players kind of thought he was a jackass.
  • Create New...