Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So, I'm prepping (a few weeks ahead) for an early encounter with King Lot as part of Madoc's retaliation raids, and I'm struggling with some technical/chronological details.

Morgause clearly isn't a factor yet, but how old is Lot at this time? Are there any retainers or other figures around him that I particularly ought to try to feature who might be fun to bring back later? Any other myth details that y'all have used effectively about the people around him, given how big a role he eventually plays?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lot is already the Hegemon of the North by 485, so I'd say that he ought to be at least in his mid-twenties by then. 1e Pendragon has his birth year as 468, but this was when the campaign would have started in 510, not 485. So he ought to be pushed back some. Lot's words about a beardless boy would ring somewhat hollow if he was a beardless boy hegemon of the North at the tender age of 17, a year YOUNGER than Arthur pulling the sword from the stone. Pushing his birth year a decade back to 458 would work for me. That would make him 32 in 490, a man in his prime, with a long reign still ahead of him. But I would be fine with him being born as late as 460, too.

King Uriens would be an obvious character to include, too, whom the PKs might meet later. King Nentres gets killed off rather early, so he matters less.

 

Edited by Morien
Link to post
Share on other sites

The gamemaster character document lists Lot as born in 467. Which seems fine to me. He clearly inherited his lands to some extent and expanded them himself. Which I think is where his comment about a beardless boy comes from. Not so much that Arthur is young, but that he's young and inexperienced and of an unknown birth unlike Lot himself who clearly wants the position. Or it could be a clear case of hypocrisy of age. A pretty common thing for people.

I agree with Morien on the other Kings though. Make sure to introduce Uriens when you're there. That way he doesn't come across as such an unknown.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Morien said:

Lot is already the Hegemon of the North by 485

He is said to be King in the GPC, but I could see him only being a Prince in the 480s. Perhaps his father (King Hedor of Lothian in the Vulgate) was olf or infirm and young Lot was a take charge, energetic leader? His father could die (old age and/or illness) or simple abdicate sometime around 489-490 at age 21. That way Lot could look at things as his having "paid his dues" as a squire while young upstart Arthur jumps the gun

 

Another thing is that Arthur's parentage isn't revealed until two years after Lot goes to war with Arthur. So the beardless boy comment could not just be a knock on Arthurs age but on his apparent lack of a claim to the throne other than drawing the sword from the stone. Lot might have reacted differently had he known that Arthur was Uther's son. In some versions of the tale, where Lot isn't killed, Lot ends up a staunch supporter of Arthur, who give him more land.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had his birth in 467. In a section that did not go into Book of Sires, I have his mother being a Pict Princess which gives him kingship through matriarchal lines when the King dies.  So, the beardless comment was more to the "lack of experience".  Yes, King Lot becomes King of Norway in at least one text and is a supporter of Arthur.  But, it is not official in that regard.  But, 467 or 468 is more KAP and moving it back would work as well.  YPMV.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really dislike the idea of Teen Lot having already subdued all the fractious Northern Lords under his banner. Arthur is able to do it because everyone in Logres is tired of in-fighting and there is an actual miracle. Of course it helps that most of the major lords of Logres as well as surrounding kings bend a knee to him swiftly. That is not the case in the North.

Besides, it makes Arthur less special when we have Lot the Wunderkind already doing the same song and dance a generation earlier.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Morien said:

I really dislike the idea of Teen Lot having already subdued all the fractious Northern Lords under his banner. Arthur is able to do it because everyone in Logres is tired of in-fighting and there is an actual miracle. Of course it helps that most of the major lords of Logres as well as surrounding kings bend a knee to him swiftly. That is not the case in the North.

Besides, it makes Arthur less special when we have Lot the Wunderkind already doing the same song and dance a generation earlier.

Me too. I'd much rather have his father do some of the "heavy lifting" and Lot taking over c.495-500 when he's seasoned a bit. Since Lot's father is only named Hedor in the Vulgate, maybe we could have his father also be named Lot in Pendragon. Then we could just assume that some of the earlier actions were done by Lot I and that the Lot in 510 was his son, Lot II.

That would make everything work without having to alter any text. 

Edited by Atgxtg
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Username said:

Thirded(?) If that matters. I had always presumed that even if Lot took over young that he had inherited a strong Lothian that was in a dominant if not the dominant position in the North. 

Well he seems to have some authority over the PIcts, who had been a problem for the bulk of the 400s. So that right there would make him a force to reckon with. Toss in the fact that he seems to have had some status in Norway, according to some sources (his story is similar to Prince Valiant's), and his battle successes and alliances in the 500s and he was close to being the dominant king in all of Britain, especially after Nanteloed died. 

He probably viewed Arthur as an upstart and threat to everything he spent the last decade or so working towards- High Kingship.

Link to post
Share on other sites

His father's name is Cadlew in the GPC and Book of Sires, btw (taken from the Harleain MS 3859).

I personally also have Cadlew as the famed northern warleader in the early Uther Period, since pushing Lot's birth back runs the risk of ironically making him too old when Arthur shows up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jmberry1s said:

His father's name is Cadlew in the GPC and Book of Sires, btw (taken from the Harleain MS 3859).

I personally also have Cadlew as the famed northern warleader in the early Uther Period, since pushing Lot's birth back runs the risk of ironically making him too old when Arthur shows up.

If the name is from MS 3859 then he's direct descendant of Llew hen ap Gwydion... which would make his ancestors interlopers in the North, presumably claiming rule via a female line.

In the Guiron cycle, Lot is illegitimate, and his legitimate sister is the Lady of Nohaut. He is descended from one of the followers of Joseph of Arimathea, Perron, in the Lancelot-Grail. I would make him at least 30 in 510 to give his insult against the 'beardless boy' some meaning. Uriens has adult bastard sons in 510 so he would have to be about 40 in 510 and since Lot was his superior and seeming elder it would look better if Lot was at least a handful of years older than him, maybe born in 465. So 468 isn't impossible...

Edit: also, the Lady of Nohaut is no older than her 30s in 522 when she meets Lancelot, which implies that Cadlew as Lot's father should really be the warlord in 485.

Edited by jeffjerwin
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jeffjerwin said:

If the name is from MS 3859 then he's direct descendant of Llew hen ap Gwydion... which would make his ancestors interlopers in the North, presumably claiming rule via a female line.

In the Guiron cycle, Lot is illegitimate, and his legitimate sister is the Lady of Nohaut. He is descended from one of the followers of Joseph of Arimathea, Perron, in the Lancelot-Grail. I would make him at least 30 in 510 to give his insult against the 'beardless boy' some meaning. Uriens has adult bastard sons in 510 so he would have to be about 40 in 510 and since Lot was his superior and seeming elder it would look better if Lot was at least a handful of years older than him, maybe born in 465. So 468 isn't impossible...

Edit: also, the Lady of Nohaut is no older than her 30s in 522 when she meets Lancelot, which implies that Cadlew as Lot's father should really be the warlord in 485.

Well, Book of Sires doesn't go quite that route - in official KAP lore, Cadlew is the son of Tybion ap Cunedda, and so Lot is kin to the kings of Merionydd. As an aside, Nentres is another great-grandson of Cunedda, although his line seems to be entirely an invention of Chaosium's (Nentres ap Clydog ap Herawd ap Cunedda). Strangely, Uriens isn't listed in either the Gododdin or Coeling family trees Book of Sires gives, although its a simple matter to add his lineage (Uriens ap Cynfarch ap Meirion ap Gwrast ap Ceneu) into the Coelings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jmberry1s said:

Well, Book of Sires doesn't go quite that route - in official KAP lore, Cadlew is the son of Tybion ap Cunedda, and so Lot is kin to the kings of Merionydd. As an aside, Nentres is another great-grandson of Cunedda, although his line seems to be entirely an invention of Chaosium's (Nentres ap Clydog ap Herawd ap Cunedda). Strangely, Uriens isn't listed in either the Gododdin or Coeling family trees Book of Sires gives, although its a simple matter to add his lineage (Uriens ap Cynfarch ap Meirion ap Gwrast ap Ceneu) into the Coelings.

That's true. Welsh genealogies have Llew (Loth) and Arawn (Nentres) as the brothers of Urien and thus sons of Cynfarch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be ok with making Lot older, or making him the grandson instead of the son. YPMV, I know, but my take on Merlin is that he saw many paths ahead and was trying to go the route to do as many as possible paths until he was forced to choose.  Lot was the pagan path choice.  When Merlin was not in the South, he was in the north advising Lot.  Else, why would Lot and Nero let Merlin anywhere near their encampment in 513. (Shades of LOTR, when Gandalf was let into the throne room of Rohan.) Arthur was the Christian path's choice.  At least, that is how I was seeing it.

The north needed more work which is one reason I dropped it for Book of Sires.  Greg thought it was a good move as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

My own thoughts on it is that I would definitely go with Lot being born in 467 or thereabouts, and thus with him becoming king before his majority. Because that means there's a story behind how Lot becomes the dominant force in Caledonia by the time he marries Margawse, one more complicated than just "He's got Pictish allies because of his mom and he's a good general, so he just conquered everyone." And if that makes Lot's comments about Arthur come off as hypocritical... I mean, why would that stop him? Heck, that's something I'd want to lean into when telling that story, not shy away from.

Going back to Lothian, Der-Ilei (Lot's mother, IIRC) is from Orkney, a notably isolated and foreboding place even to the Picts, and  where Margawse is going to retire to after Lot's death, so her being cut from the same cloth won't exactly be a stretch. A powerful (but not necessarily evil) Pictish enchantress would make for an interesting regent for Lot. Young Lot would necessarily be very dependent on the loyalty and skills of his relatives and vassals, too, so there's a lot more potential for interesting political factionalism, likely centered around Lot's Cymric followers and his Pictish relatives being at odds, but with Lot needing both of them to secure his reign, leading to a delicate balancing act that only starts to get resolved when Lot comes into his own and isn't as reliant on others to secure his rule for him. I'm seeing a lot of potential in that setup for roleplay and character creation options.

It'd be the kind of tense political situation you don't quite see in Logres outside of the Anarchy (since Uther is always hugely advantaged in any purely internal struggle, and Arthur even more so).

Link to post
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.

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...