Jump to content

Chivalric & other ideals (including NOBILIS: a new Roman ideal)


Recommended Posts

I got a problem with Chivalric: the +100 Glory annual award is making one PK advancing way too quicket than the others.

I know that he must keep the ideals, behave....etc....he does all of that.

 

I allowed to use it in Uther period since tthe book 5.2 says that it works in "all periods" and that bloody "80+" writing was on all PC sheets.

However, I realized that it is relatively easy to get it (80 pts) (and I've read how other people have also complained about it in the past and that it should be set at 96....but, by a matter of fact, the book says "80" and the book says "it works in all periods" (even if it is written in the "future" chapter).

 

I like the solution of adding a "Pugnacious" ideal typical of Uther times, and I guess I'll start using it next time.

 

I was just wondering: did anybody ever create ideals OTHER than Chivalric and Pugnacious?

Speaking of Uther times: I was thinking about something for Stoic Roman Equites still clinging on old Roman ideas (and maybe trying to limiting passions) ... but I'm still thinking about it.

 

So the question is: do we have other homebrew ideals, created by anybody? 

Edited by Luca Cherstich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about something like this???

NOBILIS

This Knight/Eques follows the ancient precepts of Roman nobilitas which are even more ancient than the coming of Christianity. The Eques is well-educated, rational, knows how to control its own passions, in order to behave like a proper, virtuous noble, worthy of his own self-respect.  He does not believe fantasies and faerie stories, as they are the products of weaker, barbaric minds. This ideals include some old, civilized ideals of the Roman elites, intermixed with precepts of the ancient Stoic philosophers. This eques does not lie, since he does not need to to offend his own self-respect, he is valorous and know how to be civilized. He knows that a rational mind can overcome any difficulty, and he is ready to perform his duty, whatever happens.

 

Requirements:

-          80 + in Valorous, Temperate, Prudent, Wordly, Energetic, Honest

-          No passion at 16+ except what follows

-          Honor and ONE Loyalty/HOmage (city or lord) must be 16+.

-          Read (Latin) at 8+

Bonus:

-          +100 annual Glory

-          +3 Major Wound Threshold  

Edited by Luca Cherstich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Luca Cherstich said:

how other people have also complained about it in the past and that it should be set at 96

Well, "other people" include Greg Stafford himself, who said that it was NEVER his intent to set it to 80, but that this was a typo since there are five religious traits (so to make it roughly equivalent, 5*16 = 80), but SIX chivalric traits (so it ought to be 6*16 = 96). At 80, the Chivalric is just so easy to achieve, rather than representing a pinnacle of heroism. Heck, we had starting characters* who had 80+ in Chivalric Traits! (Same criticism on your Nobilis idea.)

* British Christian: Energetic 13, Generous 13, Modest 13. Just 16 (one Famous Trait), Merciful 10 and Valorous 15. Total 80 even. Without using any miscellaneous picks, too.

(Of course, in our house rules, we do it differently from the above two options, too.)

39 minutes ago, Luca Cherstich said:

I got a problem with Chivalric: the +100 Glory annual award is making one PK advancing way too quicket than the others.

You are not the only one who has a problem with that. My issue is that it is also double-dipping, if you are getting Glory from the Traits as well. Same thing with Religious. You either get the glory from those 5 traits at 16+, or you get the Glory for achieving the ideal. I prefer the former (and have house ruled it), as those 16+ Traits force the character to act in a certain manner, hence enforcing the code of conduct and placing some burden on the character.

25 minutes ago, Luca Cherstich said:

He does not believe fantasies and faerie stories, as they are the products of weaker, barbaric minds.

Faeries are explicitly real in (default) Pendragon. These 'stoic Romans' are delusional. Magic exists. Dragons and monsters exist. Now, you can change that in your own game, but as far as the default goes, these Romans are going to have a major crisis of worldview as soon as the first faerie-related thing happens (such as the invasion of Summerland).

25 minutes ago, Luca Cherstich said:

-          No passion at 16+ except what follows

That is pretty harsh, as you are not allowed to love your family or wife passionately either. I see where you are coming from, the Stoicism of it all, but this is a big restriction other ideals do not have.

 

Also, is this Nobilis a religion, replacing Christianity/Paganism, or something you are stacking on top with Chivalric and Religion, too?

Edited by Morien
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Morien said:

Well, "other people" include Greg Stafford himself, who said that it was NEVER his intent to set it to 80, but that this was a typo since there are five religious traits (so to make it roughly equivalent, 5*16 = 80), but SIX chivalric traits (so it ought to be 6*16 = 96). At 80, the Chivalric is just so easy to achieve, rather than representing a pinnacle of heroism. Heck, we had starting characters* who had 80+ in Chivalric Traits! (Same criticism on your Nobilis idea.)

And I should have noticed this before!

Unfortunately the Core Rules (and the PK sheet on roll 20, as well as the official Chaosium KAP sheet) are all set with that 80 threshold!

We are already 4 years deep into the campaign and one knight has been getting that +100 every year ....

Now I have 3 options 

1) I tell the "Chivalric" player he is no more Chivalric and take 400 glory from him for the past 4 years .... it's not good, but it should be fair for the other PK

2) I introduce other options (like Pugnacious or Nobilis....which needs to be fixed, or other if any of you have other house rules) in order to give other options to other PK

3) ignore the situation....but the Chivalric PK will raise SO MUCH in Glory compared to others...

I'm frankly in doubt about what is fair to do.....any suggestion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Luca Cherstich said:

I'm frankly in doubt about what is fair to do.....any suggestion?

You are only 4 years in, so I would definitely talk about it with the player. You are clearly uncomfortable as the GM with the situation. On the other hand, the player may have deliberately designed the character in order to qualify for Chivalric for the bonuses, so I think it would be fair to allow him to adjust the character (such as, if he has been using the Famous Trait or miscellaneous picks in chargen or annual training or Glory Bonus Points to improve his Traits in order to qualify) if he wants to. Do remind him that he does get Annual Glory for any high Traits he has, and that often those good traits are their own reward as well. 

In our campaign, not only did we have house rules for Chivalric (such as getting rid of +100 Annual Glory and allowing tiered qualification), but the whole thing didn't kick in until Arthur established the Round Table in 514. Before that, being Chivalric just meant that most of the knights were eyerolling: "Oh yeah, that idiot goody-twoshoes." So it would not have been worth any Glory (even if we hadn't gotten rid of the Annual Glory), but also Armor of Honor wasn't a thing for us. Now, you might want to make Chivalric still possible pre-Arthur, just making it harder, etc. That is totally up to you. KAP 5.2 does insist that you do take an actual oath, which to me sounds more like something appropriate once Arthur makes it popular, but YPMW.

There is also the #3 that you listed: it is not unfair if the other PKs can do it, too. Simply because they haven't is their own choice. 100 per year is 2000 in 20 years, the approximate career of a knight. This means that the Chivalric knight has gotten 2 Glory Bonus Points. How many he has lost to keep qualifying for Chivalric? How many annual trainings? It won't crash your campaign, and you will likely see much bigger Glory gaps between older knights and new, young knights of the next generation, filling their fathers'/brothers' shoes. The +3 Armor is a huge benefit, though. But again, other Players can make that a goal for their characters as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Luca Cherstich said:

I got a problem with Chivalric: the +100 Glory annual award is making one PK advancing way too quicket than the others.

I have a bit of a problem with it as well. Mostly because the bonus is tied to the trait values rather than the actual ideals. I once had a game where a PK did something very unchivalric but had high traits. As GM I overuled the traits and removed his bonus for that year.

 

As far as one PK advancing quicker than the others- that's not an issue. Pendragon isn't D&D and the PKS do not have to earn the same amount of glory each year. Its' preferectly okay if one knight has two or even three times more glory than the other PKs. In fact that's one of the good things about the game. If a PK does earn glory faster than the other PKs he earned it for something. Even high trait glory is earned, as the traits often lead to consequences.

 

8 hours ago, Luca Cherstich said:

I allowed to use it in Uther period since tthe book 5.2 says that it works in "all periods" and that bloody "80+" writing was on all PC sheets.

Two points here:

1) Greg later stated that 80+ was an error based on 16*5=80, instead of 16*6=96, which makes the bonus much harder to qualify for. I'll take Greg at his word there, but I will also point out that the 80+ was much harder to get in previous editions, especially KAP1.

2) Greg did mention in places that Chivalry isn't recognized in the early periods of the game. In my own campaign I allow for the armor or honor, but there is no extra glory or recognition to go along with it. 

8 hours ago, Luca Cherstich said:

However, I realized that it is relatively easy to get it (80 pts) (and I've read how other people have also complained about it in the past and that it should be set at 96....but, by a matter of fact, the book says "80" and the book says "it works in all periods" (even if it is written in the "future" chapter).

Yes, the book does say that, but only because Greg didn't get to fix that. Most of the text in 5.2 comes from KAP5, which had a lot of errors in it, and was released before the GPC or any of the other KAP5 supplments. So 80+ and all eras were both superseded in latter books.

8 hours ago, Luca Cherstich said:

 

I like the solution of adding a "Pugnacious" ideal typical of Uther times, and I guess I'll start using it next time.

 

I was just wondering: did anybody ever create ideals OTHER than Chivalric and Pugnacious?

I believe Greg was working on something like that for KAP6. There was also talk of there being some sort of tier system to the bonuses so that rather than be all or nothing there could be greater rewards for those who more strongly represent the ideals. I don't know exactly what Greg had in mind, but most of the existing bonuses could be b roken up into two or three tiers pretty easily. 

 

8 hours ago, Luca Cherstich said:

Speaking of Uther times: I was thinking about something for Stoic Roman Equites still clinging on old Roman ideas (and maybe trying to limiting passions) ... but I'm still thinking about it.

So the question is: do we have other homebrew ideals, created by anybody? 

Yes, but, I think we'd be better off seeing if such a system is put in place in KAP6 first. Also we might want to be careful about adding in too many such bonuses, or else will will wind up with bonuses for each culture or philosophical outlook. The game is focused around knights, and knightly ideals should be superior to other concepts in the game.

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In our game, we felt that yearly passive glory bonuses were overshadowing active glory, so we reduced them. We liked the concept of them though, thinking that they represented glorious stuff you do during the rest of the year, so we did not want to remove them entirely.

What we've used for the last four years or so:
* At least one famous trait: 10 glory (but more than one famous traits does not give more glory)
* At least one famous passion: 10 (as above)
* Vassal/estate holder/baron/king: 10/30/60/100
* Ideals: 50 each

We kept the 80 limit for Chivalrous, though. I like that it's achievable for somewhat flawed knights. Knights with 96 in those traits may seem a bit... boring? I don't think the Gawain and Tristan of my mind's eye would qualify, for example, although I would still let them be chivalrous. At least Gawain.

Edited by Baba
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Baba said:

In our game, we felt that yearly passive glory bonuses were overshadowing active glory, so we reduced them.

Yep, that was a bit of a problem in our first campaign, where Ideals were +100 on top of the Trait & Passion Glory. Most PKs got around 200 Annual Passive Glory, so it was around the same that they got from adventuring, usually. Some adventures were more, some were less. In any case, there was one PK who was 400+, thanks to being a Chivalric Christian, and this started to be a bit of a problem as his passive Glory totally swamped whatever else he did during the year. I am not blaming the player, by the way, he played the game totally within the rules and he did put effort on getting both of those Ideals (Chivalric was still the old 80+, though, so every PK had it).

In our current campaign, we do not give Ideals Glory, but that hasn't stopped the players from trying to achieve them: the benefit of Armor of Honor is huge, and the Religious bonuses are nice as well. They already get Glory for Famous Traits, so no need to allow for double-dipping.

58 minutes ago, Baba said:

* At least one famous trait: 10 glory (but more than one famous traits does not give more glory)

In our Middle-earth variant, we did something similar-ish. We bundled the Passions under the headings like Love, Loyalty, Hate... And only the Highest Passion within each category was counted. This way, you couldn't collect half a dozen Loyalties or Hates and get Glory for all of them. If you hate Sauron with 22, who cares that you hate Grima Wormtongue at 16?

51 minutes ago, Baba said:

We kept the 80 limit for Chivalrous, though. I like that it's achievable for somewhat flawed knights. Knights with 96 in those traits may seem a bit... boring? I don't think the Gawain and Tristan of my mind's eye would qualify, for example, although I would still let them be chivalrous. At least Gawain.

We have a tiered system, as I think I explained in my house rules thread. It works quite nicely, and since it requires traits (and/or Honor) at 16+, it incorporates the higher Glory the more Chivalric you are via Famous Trait/Passion Glory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest, it's not RAW, but I would reduce the courtesy bonus during Uther's reign and anarchy, to reflect this harsh times.

I would still give 100 glory points/year, but not the armor of courtesy. Or maybe the contrary.

1 hour ago, Baba said:

In our game, we felt that yearly passive glory bonuses were overshadowing active glory, so we reduced them.

Maybe half the glory is enough? 50 pts of glory/year to be courteous, and 50 pts to be religious. I have the feeling too that the passive glory is too much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Morien said:

We have a tiered system, as I think I explained in my house rules thread. It works quite nicely, and since it requires traits (and/or Honor) at 16+, it incorporates the higher Glory the more Chivalric you are via Famous Trait/Passion Glory.

Sounds good!

4 hours ago, Tizun Thane said:

Maybe half the glory is enough? 50 pts of glory/year to be courteous, and 50 pts to be religious. I have the feeling too that the passive glory is too much.

Agreed!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the end of the day I feel that (at least for the moment) I'll keep the same rules, just trying to be more rigid in subtracting trait points in case of no proper "chivalric" behaviour.

Furthermore, we also try to keep (at least for the Uther period) to keep the Pugnacious and Nobilis alternatives, although I guess I have to re-adapt the "Nobilis".

I was thinking about other passion-limiting things (like reducind chances of become disheartened or maddened) but, at the end, I just decided leave the to get rid of the whole passions-issue and keep things easy (passions are a too important element in the KAP system for being completely avoided).

 

This is my second attempt at a "Nobilis" ideal.

I have also somehow changed some traits (taken Energetic and added Suspicious) to reflect traits more typical of Romans in the BoK&L and also to further differentiate from Chivalric and Pugnacious.

 

NOBILIS (V. 2.0)

This Knight/Eques follows the old, civilized ways and precepts of Nobilitas and Romanitas which are even more ancient than the coming of Christianity.

A Nobilis is, by its own nature, well educated, and interested to know about the great Romans of antiquity. In this debased age the only examples of ancient virtue can be seen in ancient literature, therefore a Nobilis is always eager to learn more about them.

The Nobilis is rational and knows how to behave like a proper, virtuous noble CIVES/ citizen, worthy of his own self-respect.

A Nobilis knows that fantasies and faerie stories are real in this world influenced by Barbaric ways and traditions (whether they are Cymric or Germanic). However, the "Nobilis" knows that only a civilized, urban and "roman" way can make a society to prosper, therefore he tends to keep his thoughts more linked to the needs of the civil society, rather than to old fantasies and tales.

The mind of a Nobilis is also partly influenced by ancient Stoic philosophy, at least in general terms, if not with proper education regarding the old authors. A Nobilis knows how to endure pain and difficulties, as he knows that a strong mind and proper virtue can overcome anything.

The Nobilis does not lie, since he does not need to to offend his own self-respect, he is valorous and knows how to be civilized. A Nobilis is never reckeless but he is always aware that evil and danger may happen, therefore what other see as a tendency for suspicion, is just an attitude to prudency, raised to its extreme. The barbarians and uncivilized can never be properly trusted, even if they are friends and allies.

A Nobilis knows that a rational mind can overcome any difficulty, and he is ready to perform his duty, whatever happens.

Requirements:

  • 80 + in Valorous, Temperate, Wordly, Honest, Prudent, Suspicious
  • Read (Latin) at 8+
  • Roman education in the background or, at least, having somehow been influenced by Roman ways of life and/or culture.
  • The Knight/Eques cannot be Chivalric, Pugnacious or Religious. If the GM allows so, only the Roman Christian Religious quality is compatible.

Bonuses and Consequences:

  • + 100 annual Glory
  •  +4 Major Wound Threshold
  • a new directed Trait: Trusting (Romans) + 3

 

NOTE: I'm dubious about giving +4 or +5 to Major Wound Threshold (since in both case is less advantageous than Chivalric Armor 3....but at the end I kept the lower bonus).

 

Edited by Luca Cherstich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Luca Cherstich said:

NOTE: I'm dubious about giving +4 or +5 to Major Wound Threshold (since in both case is less advantageous than Chivalric Armor 3....but at the end I kept the lower bonus).

Well Roman Christian +6 HP is worse (except when one-shot) than Armor of Honor +3. It is probably no wonder that in a game inspired by the paragons of Chivalry (Arthur & his Knights of the Round Table), it is Chivalric that is the bestest Ideal. On the other hand, nothing prevents a Chivalric knight from being a Christian Paragon as well, which is another 'hidden' downside of Nobilis: not only are you getting a worse bonus but it also limits on what else you can stack with it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am thinking that it would work better as Stoicism (Religion). That way, you can balance it against other religions, rather than against the overpowered Chivalric.

Maybe something like:

Required Traits (at 16+): Valorous, Temperate, Just, Honest, and Prudent

Bonus: +3 Major Wound Threshold

That gives Stoicism Two overlapping traits with Chivalric, same as Roman Christianity.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Morien said:

I am thinking that it would work better as Stoicism (Religion). That way, you can balance it against other religions, rather than against the overpowered Chivalric.

Maybe something like:

Required Traits (at 16+): Valorous, Temperate, Just, Honest, and Prudent

Bonus: +3 Major Wound Threshold

That gives Stoicism Two overlapping traits with Chivalric, same as Roman Christianity.

Do not know if it's too much but i'm kind of thinkinf about having Nobilis AND stoicism....

Most  Roman equites in Britannia should be Roman Christian but a few are real stoic...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK.

Off course it depends on personal tastes but the point is that "How much" Roman we want Romans to be in the civitates of Britannia.

And, furthermore, even the concept of "Roman" is here very abstract, unreal and simplified compared to the reality of what we call "Romanization" (a complicated issue...better to be ignored in the fantasy KAP world).

I feel that I'll keep the "Nobilis" as a generic "Romanized/Noble" eques-style ideal (including some generic Stoic elements, but without full religious approach which seems odd for the 5th/6th cent. AD). The Nobilis ideal can be added to basic religious belief (either Roman Christian or Roman Stoic or Roman Pagan if exists) but not to real RELIGIOUS (+100 Glory) vbonus (a part, maybe from Roman Christian).

At the end of the day, it's all part of the "Old World" which should be almost dead or in its twilight during the age of Uther, mostly surviving in the few Roman civitates.

Possibly in Arthur's times most of these Roman ideals or philosophies just disappear or fade away, and chivalric ideals triumph.

 

However, if we want to turn "Roman Stoic" to a full religion we need to set the basic parameters of traits for character creation....what about the following?

Chaste 12/10 Lustful

Energetic 10/10 Lazy

 Forgiving 10/10 Vengeful

Generous 10/10 Selfish

Honest 12/8 Deceitful

Just 12/8 Arbitrary

Merciful 10/10 Cruel

Modest 10/10 Proud

Spiritual 8/12 Wordly

Prudent 12 / 10 Reckless

Temperate 13 / 7 Indulgent

Trusting 10 /10  Suspicious

Valorous 15/5 Cowardly 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And regarding (again!) on Nobilis ideal (NOT the Stoic religion/philosphy)  I'm thinking about the possible traits...."Energetic" maybe should be part of the Nobilis, since to be Active is often seen as a good things by old Roman standards ...

So, the traits for Nobilis now are: Valorous, Temperate, Wordly, Honest, Prudent, Suspicious

If I want to introduce Enegergetic, and i Want to I'm still in doubt whether to remove Honest or Suspicious.

However, Romans in BoK&L p. 46 tend to have better suspicious than Honest, but here we are speaking about a "Noble/Nobilis" Romans, not a normal Roman Eques ...

 

EDIT:

A new attempt at NOBILIS

 

NOBILIS (V. 3.0)

This Knight/Eques follows the old, civilized ways and precepts of Nobilitas and Romanitas which are even more ancient than the coming of Christianity.

A Nobilis is, by its own nature, well educated (READING LATIN 8+), and interested to know about the great Romans of antiquity. In this debased age the only examples of ancient virtue can be seen in ancient literature, therefore a Nobilis is always eager to learn more about them.

The Nobilis is rational and knows how to behave like a proper, virtuous noble CIVES/ citizen, worthy of his own self-respect.

A Nobilis knows that fantasies and faerie stories are real in this world influenced by Barbaric ways and traditions (whether they are Cymric or Germanic). However, the "Nobilis" knows that only a civilized, urban and "roman" way can make a society to prosper, therefore he tends to keep his thoughts more linked to the needs of the civil society (WORDLY), rather than to old fantasies and tales.

A Nobilis is a man of action (ENERGETIC), as he knows how the old "patres" of ancient Rome disdained the "otium" and recomended hard work to reach one's objectives.

The mind of a Nobilis is also partly influenced by ancient Stoic philosophy, at least in general terms, if not with proper education regarding the old authors. A Nobilis knows how to endure pain and difficulties, as he knows that a strong mind and proper virtue can overcome anything. However, this may happens only if proper self-control and discipline are exercized (TEMPERATE), keeping one away from the barbaric laxity and lack of "decorum".

The Nobilis does not lie (HONEST), since he does not need to to offend his own self-respect, he values courage in battle (VALOROUS) and knows how to be civilized. A Nobilis is never reckeless but he is always aware that evil and danger may happen (PRUDENT).

A Nobilis knows that a rational mind can overcome any difficulty, and he is ready to perform his duty, whatever happens.

Requirements:

  • 80 + in Valorous, Temperate, Wordly, Honest, Prudent, Energetic
  • Read (Latin) at 8+
  • Roman education in the background or, at least, having somehow been influenced by Roman ways of life and/or culture.
  • The Knight/Eques cannot be Chivalric, Pugnacious or Religious. If the GM allows so, only the "Roman Christian Religious" quality is compatible.

Bonuses and Consequences:

  • + 100 annual Glory
  •  +4 Major Wound Threshold

 

Edited by Luca Cherstich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/8/2020 at 6:04 AM, Tizun Thane said:

To be honest, it's not RAW, but I would reduce the courtesy bonus during Uther's reign and anarchy, to reflect this harsh times.

I would still give 100 glory points/year, but not the armor of courtesy. Or maybe the contrary.

Maybe half the glory is enough? 50 pts of glory/year to be courteous, and 50 pts to be religious. I have the feeling too that the passive glory is too much.

I do the oppoiste. My reasoing is that the glory comes from the behavior being considered noble-something that isn't really the case until chilvary takes off.

Meanwhile the "Armor of Honor" is a magical effect comes from the approval of a higher power, and thus happens regardless of if the characters gets fame/glory for it.

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Morien said:

Too much overlap. I wouldn't allow it in my campaign.🙂

Me either. I could see that eventually turning into several codes/philosophies for each culture. The Celts, Irish and Saxons all had their own warrior cultures with their own set of virtues. That's basically what the religious bonus reflects. Chivalry stood out apart because it is about being a knight. I think if we go down the rabbit hole of various philosophies and codes of ethics we will wind up with dozens of bonuses, and everybody will wind up qualifying for something. 

Once everybody has some type of special bonus, then the bonuses are no longer special.

 

  • Like 1

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Me either. I could see that eventually turning into several codes/philosophies for each culture. The Celts, Irish and Saxons all had their own warrior cultures with their own set of virtues. That's basically what the religious bonus reflects. Chivalry stood out apart because it is about being a knight. I think if we go down the rabbit hole of various philosophies and codes of ethics we will wind up with dozens of bonuses, and everybody will wind up qualifying for something. 

Once everybody has some type of special bonus, then the bonuses are no longer special.

 

OK, but I'm trying to build the "Nobilis" as a kind of "Old-style" Roman Eques ideal.

Maybe better not to mesh it with Religious things, since it's more about  "Roman elite civilized ways" than about religious fanaticism.

I can understand why most people may disdain to use it....but I'm a Classical Archeologist and sometimes, even if Romans are not the focus in KAP, I feel that they should need some more detail, especially in the earlier time periods, before Arthurian chivalry becomes the norm.

Edited by Luca Cherstich
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Luca Cherstich said:

OK, but I'm trying to build the "Nobilis" as a kind of "Old-style" Roman Eques ideal.

Maybe better not to mesh it with Religious things, since it's more about  "Roman elite civilized ways" than about religious fanaticism.

I can understand why most people may disdain to use it....but I'm a Classical Archeologist and sometimes, even if Romans are not the focus in KAP, I feel that they should need some more detail, especially in the earlier time periods, before Arthurian chivalry becomes the norm.

OH, I get the idea behind it. I once wrote up rules for Legionaries for KAP4. 

I think the problem here is that once you give the Romans something special what do you give everyone else? Chivalry works because it is a core concept to all knights. "Noblis" won't work if it is just a Roman concept. -not unless you run a more Romano-historical King Arthur where the Knights of the Round Table are all Romans. Otherwise you just end up elevating the Roman culture and it's values above all the other cultures -including British Feudalism, which isn't so good for a game about King Arthur and Knighthood.

So you got quite the tightrope to walk across. 

  • Like 1

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand...but, on the other hand I still feel that there are a few weaknesses in the "Nobilis" ideal which will make it less convenient to Chivalric in the long run:

- Lack of compatibility with most Religious bonuses

- Major Wound Threshold bonus is less useful than proper Chivalric Armor bonus

- You need be educated (Reading Latin 8+) and you need to have been raised in Roman culture (which is something which, maybe, I feel will decline during the Age of Arthur in the big cities, as everything quickly becomes more "Medieval").

 

And, regarding the "each culture will want its ideal" problem, i frankly believe that having a universal "Roman ideal" is not the same as a specific Saxon, Cymric, German or Frisian ideal.

I know this is a big mess (and to be "Roman" in antiquity was not the same as having an exact ethnic identity since one can be BOTH Roman and having a local ethnic identity ... although off course KAP semplifies everything with the different ethnic cultures).

In my view the "Romanitas" in the old times is the "generic/universal virtue" towards which everybody tended (whatever the culture) when the Empire was properly working (legions, globalized market, etc..).

Maybe Pugnacious is a more barbaric alternative, but my "Nobilis" aims to be universal .... as far as Roman "civilization" endures.

And I feel that it will not endure for long.

Later on, in the age of Arthur everybody will prefer to be "Chivalric", since Chivalric will be the new universal.

 

I know this is just me and "Your KAP may vary", and I do not pretend to have the single truth (especially since I'm way less expert with KAP than most of those here in this forum!).

And, at the end of the day, even my "Nobilis" is not perfect since it is just a very limited, simplified and subjectively (and possibly wrongly) defined ideal of what ""Roman"" elite ideals possibly were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Meanwhile the "Armor of Honor" is a magical effect comes from the approval of a higher power, and thus happens regardless of if the characters gets fame/glory for it.

Agreed. I was thinking the same.

24 minutes ago, Luca Cherstich said:

In my view the "Romanitas" in the old times is the "generic/universal virtue" towards which everybody tended (whatever the culture) when the Empire was properly working (legions, globalized market, etc..).

I understand your concerns, but... The bonus of chivalry is magical by nature. Like the religious one, for the "saints" of the religion. The bonus (boni?) are here to be faithful to the sources, where a chivalric knight is a better man, on the court and on the field. Same for the christian characters. That's why the "good ones" won, despite all odds. They have the bonus of chivalry.

The roman ethos is dead in arthurians times, like the roman empire.

The Nobilis bonus seems like a cool bonus, but is detrimental to the game. After all, each culture have his own ideals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...