Feast Question

[Morien]

55 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Not a good idea. As it stands now the number of cards drawn is depending upon the PKs glory "band" So the more glorious knights draw more cards and choose which one to play.  

I am not seeing why the APP roll would be a problem? Are the high-Glory individuals allowed to hang onto their cards, or do they just get more choice what to play? In any case, I don't see why APP roll couldn't be considered in there, too. It could be even tweaked so that you will have to succeed in APP to even get to draw the extra cards. If you are an APP 5 troll, you can be famous as all heck but people could still avoid you socially... Giving APP some teeth.

I do agree with you that APP is currently a dump stat in RAW. Which is why we:

1.) Roll APP randomly,  while the rest of the stats are distributed. You can raise APP with your stat points, but get no points back if you wish to lower it. This is to keep it from being used as a dump stat, since before this was done, APP 8 was the norm for new knights...

2.) Base all courtly skill Glory rewards on APP, rather than flat 10. (Granted, I would still rather have a knight with STR 20 and APP 10 than the other way around, but it helps a bit.)

3.) Have APP play a role in our own Feast rules, as stated before in this thread.

 

[Morien]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

Note really. To buy a crtical the PK would have to have an APP or 29, and that's not all that common. For most people it does increase the chance of a critical but slightly. 

Note that I was suggesting APP+Glory/1000. It becomes much easier to have APP in high 20s in this method, and hence easy to upgrade with jewelry, even if they are capped at +10 (if they are?).

Granted, as I have said, I don't own the book so I am not sure how the jewelry works over long term. But if you can reuse it for the same bonus, it becomes very easy and convenient way to store your treasure in this way and get high bonus out of it. I am all for knights having some bling, but it might become a bit too easy to buy your way up.

Although I agree with you that from the sound of it, it might be more fun to NOT critical, since then you get to play with the cards.

[Atgxtg]

16 minutes ago, Morien said:

Note that I was suggesting APP+Glory/1000. It becomes much easier to have APP in high 20s in this method, and hence easy to upgrade with jewelry, even if they are capped at +10 (if they are?).

Yup 10 point cap. 

16 minutes ago, Morien said:

Granted

, as I have said, I don't own the book so I am not sure how the jewelry works over long term. But if you can reuse it for the same bonus, it becomes very easy and convenient way to store your treasure in this way and get high bonus out of it. I am all for knights having some bling, but it might become a bit too easy to buy your way up.

It is reasonable. Fashion skill is part of that. I think the answer would probably be an increasing cost for the next plus +1.IN all honesty APP should probably be taken out of the equation, but again it's the one place where APP means something. 

16 minutes ago, Morien said:

Although I agree with you that from the sound of it, it might be more fun to NOT critical, since then you get to play with the cards.

Yeah, from a game play standpoint sitting above the salt mostly sucks. Yes you get to sit with the bigwigs, and you get extra glory and generality, but those playing cards will generally win the geniality contest, because they will get cards that give more geniality, that what PKs can get with skill rolls. Plus the cards tend to be more interesting and fun that the standard options. A PK does have the option to downgrade their seating though.

[Hzark10]

On 4/5/2019 at 8:50 AM, Atgxtg said:

Yup 10 point cap. 

I glad there is an upper cap.  Makes those who are truly beautiful have to depend less on trinkets while those who are a bit lower can improve themselves.

[Atgxtg]

9 minutes ago, Hzark10 said:

I glad there is an upper cap.  Makes those who are truly beautiful have to depend less on trinkets while those who are a bit lower can improve themselves.

Yeah although 10 points is a pretty big cap, being about equal to most PKs APP score. It also does mean that a PK with a high APP and lots of bling is going to critical the APP roll a lot and be able to sit at the high table for 100 glory. If someone runs a lot of feasts that could add up.

Of course having an extra 10 libra to spend on on jewelry can be an obstacle in and of itself. 

 

 

[Khanwulf]

On 4/7/2019 at 10:34 AM, Atgxtg said:

Yeah although 10 points is a pretty big cap, being about equal to most PKs APP score. It also does mean that a PK with a high APP and lots of bling is going to critical the APP roll a lot and be able to sit at the high table for 100 glory. If someone runs a lot of feasts that could add up.

Of course having an extra 10 libra to spend on on jewelry can be an obstacle in and of itself. 

And/or tailor. And keep in mind that some jewelry is magical and gives APP bonuses. It's not too hard mechanically to take a very pretty APP and crank it up into Ygraine-category. 

This is a reason to make the stat's impact more flexible than the other physical attributes. Though awarding Glory for flat APP at time of event is still ok, as it will only add up over time.

 

--Khanwulf

[Atgxtg]

1 minute ago, Khanwulf said:

And/or tailor.

Doubly so since clothing depreciates in value. IMO, the two should be separate bonuses each with a lower cap. Otherwise the PKs will just buy 10 libra of jewelry, and not bother with the  fineclothing. 

1 minute ago, Khanwulf said:

And keep in mind that some jewelry is magical and gives APP bonuses. It's not too hard mechanically to take a very pretty APP and crank it up into Ygraine-category. 

Ah, but those are modfiers, not  actually APP. You can take an APP6  character and spend 10 libra of fine clothing and jewelry, and while I have no doubt that people might stare, I don't think anybody should be generating an amor passion over it. So it's the APP stat that counts. Besides if we factored in for bling then both Guinevere and Ygrane would be over 40 points. 

Now we could set the threshold to 40, or tie it to a crtical APP roll (in which case the reason why it is automatic for both ladies makes sense since at 39+ it would be). 

1 minute ago, Khanwulf said:

This is a reason to make the stat's impact more flexible than the other physical attributes.

I agree. But we need to consider just how powerful to make it. I think eiother a high threshold to keep it rare, or an crtical APP roll would be needed. 

1 minute ago, Khanwulf said:

Though awarding Glory for flat APP at time of event is still ok, as it will only add up over time

Yeah. I was thinking that if they got glory for APP like a Trait or Passion it would help. It's not much but another 16-25 glory a year helps.

Also since Book of feats turns geniality into glory at the end, I could see geniality points give glory as well. So a wife who is active at court could pick up a few more glory points that way. 

[Khanwulf]

3 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Doubly so since clothing depreciates in value. IMO, the two should be separate bonuses each with a lower cap. Otherwise the PKs will just buy 10 libra of jewelry, and not bother with the  fineclothing. 

Ah, but those are modfiers, not  actually APP. You can take an APP6  character and spend 10 libra of fine clothing and jewelry, and while I have no doubt that people might stare, I don't think anybody should be generating an amor passion over it. So it's the APP stat that counts. Besides if we factored in for bling then both Guinevere and Ygrane would be over 40 points. 

Now we could set the threshold to 40, or tie it to a crtical APP roll (in which case the reason why it is automatic for both ladies makes sense since at 39+ it would be). 

I agree. But we need to consider just how powerful to make it. I think eiother a high threshold to keep it rare, or an crtical APP roll would be needed. 

Yeah. I was thinking that if they got glory for APP like a Trait or Passion it would help. It's not much but another 16-25 glory a year helps.

Also since Book of feats turns geniality into glory at the end, I could see geniality points give glory as well. So a wife who is active at court could pick up a few more glory points that way. 

I've not figured out how the formatting works for splitting quotes up like you do, so I'll just dig in:

An APP 6 character isn't going to be hitting huge levels of effective APP from "investment" without a staff swarming over then and dripping them with equipment. And at that point they still won't come close. Over 20, sure, but when they start taking all that stuff off it'll be horrifying. You could do a nice story about that. People these days certainly have! 

That's not going to get you a love-aura, however. I think the threshold has to be 40+. At that point your casual presence is enough to transfix those unfamiliar with your grace, and your (undoubtedly critical) performance in court goes through them like thunderbolts. For good or ill. 

Prior to that, you could force the issue perhaps by purposefully paying attention to someone and succeeding in an appropriate roll to impress them, at which point they check of Amor, etc. This could apply on first scene meeting, or be re-rolled later if the [lady] sets out to do so. Once you've either rolled through the social skills in and around the individual, or failed in an encounter, you'll just forever a (very) pretty face. --In other words, a known quantity, even if eminently desirable. 

In all this, it's key to not separate the base stat and bonuses. Why? Because raising APP temporarily is part of the attribute! It's... honestly one of the few things going for it, the fact you can stack modifiers on it. So investing to do so should pay off: moth and rust destroy, and thieves break in and steal, and even age takes its toll, so there's as much a race against time here as a knight dumping libra into horse and arms.

And a bit of glory is fine--especially for the ladies. Basically the discussion here are about jazzing up social play, which the domain of wives and ladies, so they are not cardboard cutouts and stat columns dispensing babies. This is... a past due correction I think, even if half the women are named Elaine.

 

--Khanwulf

 

 

[Atgxtg]

23 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

I've not figured out how the formatting works for splitting quotes up like you do, so I'll just dig in:

There are a few ways to do it. THe first is to quote mutiple times and delete the bits you don't want. The other is to click on the spot you want to post at, then do a few carraige rturns until it breaks the qoute up into sections. 

23 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

An APP 6 character isn't going to be hitting huge levels of effective APP from "investment" without a staff swarming over then and dripping them with equipment. And at that point they still won't come close. Over 20, sure, but when they start taking all that stuff off it'll be horrifying. You could do a nice story about that. People these days certainly have! 

The APP modfiers from Jewelry etc. cap at 10 total. So the most an APP 6 character is going to get is APP 16. And that just modifiers not their APP score (in fact Feasts even distinguishes  the two at one point). 

[Uhtred]

I'd like to throw a couple of cents into this topic - 

1) Sitting Above the Salt isn't very beneficial to most players.  Yes it boosts your Geniality and you gain 100 Glory at the end, but not being able to get cards binds your options to interacting with the upper echelons attending the event - and if that is outside your comfort zone you are likely to gain more enmity for your faux pas then admiration for your bling and threads. 

2) Boosting your APP through jewelry / clothing / attendants / etc. helps give you a chance to Crit your roll and get to Sit Above the Salt, but this isn't a boon for your APP 6 PK.  First - see above.  Second, if your APP is that bad and you throw on a lot of gold and new clothing you are more than likely being invited to the High Table as entertainment for the hosts and their guests (somewhere between Dinner for Schmucks and Malibu's Most Wanted).  It is unlikely that you are wearing the proper accents and styles, it is more likely you have donned Mr. T's collection of gold plated chains.

As always, YPMV, but for my game PK's who get seated above their proper station have to make Courtesy rolls every few rounds to make sure they are keeping their heads above water with the people around them.  During our last Feast a PK got his Crit and sat AtS and hated the lack of interactions generated by the cards, eventually he decided to start flirting with the women - which were mostly the wives and daughters of the Dukes and Barons - and being a simple household knight he was roundly rebuffed.  When we convene for our next session there may well be some issues that he and the rest of the group have to address as one or more of the husbands / fathers complain, either directly to Roderick or to the PK's.  This is something actually to be considered in the Wives thread, the possibility that a wife complains of unwanted attention during a Feast or Court (either real or imagined) may be the base for a feud for a PK that lasts through the generations.

[Atgxtg]

2 hours ago, Uhtred said:

I'd like to throw a couple of cents into this topic - 

1) Sitting Above the Salt isn't very beneficial to most players.  Yes it boosts your Geniality and you gain 100 Glory at the end, but not being able to get cards binds your options to interacting with the upper echelons attending the event

I agree. It's basically playing it safe. The PK will get 5-15 Genality plus 100 Glory with little or no risk. 

2 hours ago, Uhtred said:

 

- and if that is outside your comfort zone you are likely to gain more enmity for your faux pas then admiration for your bling and threads. 

Not so much. Generallt it's hard to really mess up at the high table as you are avoiding the cards. A PK could easily game for the feat sand keep a low profile, and go home with 105 more glory.

2 hours ago, Uhtred said:

2) Boosting your APP through jewelry / clothing / attendants / etc. helps give you a chance to Crit your roll and get to Sit Above the Salt, but this isn't a boon for your APP 6 PK.  First - see above. 

I disagree. First off the extra blind for low APP characters doesn't alter their chance of sitting at the high table at all, the still need a critical success and that a 5% chance for anyone with a modified APP under 21. They need a critical success. Secondly, it does benefit those characters by increasing their chances of sitting near the salt increasing their geniality and and avoiding some sort of seating arrangement incident. 

2 hours ago, Uhtred said:

 

Second, if your APP is that bad and you throw on a lot of gold and new clothing you are more than likely being invited to the High Table as entertainment for the hosts and their guests (somewhere between Dinner for Schmucks and Malibu's Most Wanted).  It is unlikely that you are wearing the proper accents and styles, it is more likely you have donned Mr. T's collection of gold plated chains.

Possible but unlikely. These are knights not serfs or jesters.  Its the sort of thing that leads to duels and even rebellion. If a liege lord invites Sir Ugly with 10,000 Glory  to sit at the high table and mocks and ridicules him all through the feast, causing a loss of Honor and Loyalty, then that lord is asking from vassal problems. It's pretty much the Uther and Gorlios situation. 

2 hours ago, Uhtred said:

As always, YPMV, but for my game PK's who get seated above their proper station have to make Courtesy rolls every few rounds to make sure they are keeping their heads above water with the people around them.

What happens if they fail?

2 hours ago, Uhtred said:

 

  During our last Feast a PK got his Crit and sat AtS and hated the lack of interactions generated by the cards, eventually he decided to start flirting with the women - which were mostly the wives and daughters of the Dukes and Barons - and being a simple household knight he was roundly rebuffed. 

Why? Such ladies would probably love to flirt with a knight, if he is good looking or has a lot of glory, or could get someone else jealous or something. At the least it would be a chance for pace from the having to deal with that idiot baron's son who keep stepping on her toes every time they dance. Such activity is acceptable social behavior. If the knight tried to do more than flirt, that another story.

If your just going to put the thumbscrews to PKs whenver the sit at the high table, then all you are doing is ensuring that they will decline the offer. 

2 hours ago, Uhtred said:

When we convene for our next session there may well be some issues that he and the rest of the group have to address as one or more of the husbands / fathers complain, either directly to Roderick or to the PK's.  This is something actually to be considered in the Wives thread, the possibility that a wife complains of unwanted attention during a Feast or Court (either real or imagined) may be the base for a feud for a PK that lasts through the generations.

It could be, but again, flirting with the ladies around you is sort of expected at social gatherings. It actually considered ruder NOT to flirt with the ladies sitting nearby-it suggests that they don't appeal to you.The skill is flirting, not groping. 

[Hzark10]

Everyone must remember, that these feasts were one chance that ladies and especially maidens had a chance to interact with those who could be paired with them through marriages.  Some marriages are arranged, but for others, this was the once chance to make impressions. There was no dating per se, no time to discuss things on the internet, or phone, etc.  Young men also play the game as it is a chance to reach higher up and try to impress those who would not normally consider him.

[Morien]

10 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

It could be, but again, flirting with the ladies around you is sort of expected at social gatherings. It actually considered ruder NOT to flirt with the ladies sitting nearby-it suggests that they don't appeal to you.The skill is flirting, not groping. 

Yep. I do not penalize PKs for Flirting, even if they fail, as long as the husband is not famously jealous, the lady or the husband are not already established to be hostile towards the PK. Now if they Fumble, then they did something that caused an offence, but even that is usually dealt with an apology and a Modest roll or a duel to first blood, not a feud.

[Uhtred]

12 hours ago, Morien said:

Yep. I do not penalize PKs for Flirting, even if they fail, as long as the husband is not famously jealous, the lady or the husband are not already established to be hostile towards the PK. Now if they Fumble, then they did something that caused an offence, but even that is usually dealt with an apology and a Modest roll or a duel to first blood, not a feud.

I do not penalize for Flirting - failed or successful.  But when a PK decides to follow a successful Flirt with a seduction, then there are consequences.

Also, the loser of a duel to first blood can sometimes build an entire life upon righting that perceived injustice.  Argan ap Maelgad WINS his duel and still uses it to build a feud that he passes down to his sons.  

Edited April 10, 2019 by Uhtred

[Atgxtg]

35 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

I do not penalize for Flirting - failed or successful.  But when a PK decides to follow a successful Flirt with a seduction, then there are consequences.

Ah, that a horse of a different color. You didn't mention that.

[Uhtred]

22 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I agree. It's basically playing it safe. The PK will get 5-15 Genality plus 100 Glory with little or no risk. 

Not so much. Generallt it's hard to really mess up at the high table as you are avoiding the cards. A PK could easily game for the feat sand keep a low profile, and go home with 105 more glory.

I disagree. First off the extra blind for low APP characters doesn't alter their chance of sitting at the high table at all, the still need a critical success and that a 5% chance for anyone with a modified APP under 21. They need a critical success. Secondly, it does benefit those characters by increasing their chances of sitting near the salt increasing their geniality and and avoiding some sort of seating arrangement incident. 

Possible but unlikely. These are knights not serfs or jesters.  Its the sort of thing that leads to duels and even rebellion. If a liege lord invites Sir Ugly with 10,000 Glory  to sit at the high table and mocks and ridicules him all through the feast, causing a loss of Honor and Loyalty, then that lord is asking from vassal problems. It's pretty much the Uther and Gorlios situation. 

What happens if they fail?

Why? Such ladies would probably love to flirt with a knight, if he is good looking or has a lot of glory, or could get someone else jealous or something. At the least it would be a chance for pace from the having to deal with that idiot baron's son who keep stepping on her toes every time they dance. Such activity is acceptable social behavior. If the knight tried to do more than flirt, that another story.

If your just going to put the thumbscrews to PKs whenver the sit at the high table, then all you are doing is ensuring that they will decline the offer. 

It could be, but again, flirting with the ladies around you is sort of expected at social gatherings. It actually considered ruder NOT to flirt with the ladies sitting nearby-it suggests that they don't appeal to you.The skill is flirting, not groping. 

It should be difficult to mess up at the high table, but when you let a bull loose in a china shop the result can be disaster.

While the % of rolling a Crit remains the same, I know few players who feel better about trying to roll a 6 as opposed to a 16.  The likelihood may be the same statistically, but most players feel better with the latter target.  And I agree that the benefit of sitting near the salt is an improvement and I do not begrudge the characters this sort of bonus, but when you have a household knight with barely 3,000 Glory sitting alongside King Uther, Prince Madoc, Duke Gorlois and his wife, Duke Ulfius and the Duke of Lindsey and his extended family following the Battle of Lindsey then a PK should be aware of the social gulf that exists at the moment.  Simply getting a Crit on APP should not place a knight of such low standing in the company of the King - and it is really egregious if a PK with APP 6 or less, no benefits from jewelry or attire, gets a Crit and then is granted a seat at the High Table because of his amazing beauty. Uhm, what??

Mockery is not always pointing and laughing, sometimes it is as simple as commenting on the out of fashion attire, the poor grooming, or lack of standing.  Court and Feasts are a form of combat all their own.  The situation between Uther and Gorlois is not unique to the 2 of them.  For instance, when the entire nobility of Logres is assembled do you think Duke Ulfius will not see the advantage of praising the Steward of Levcomgus - who has been excluded from this lofty gathering - at the expense of a household knight of one of Roderick's vassals?  The PK can not claim he was slighted, and Roderick can not fault Ulfius for praising his absent retainer, but the point is made none the less.  

Flirting with the ladies of the high table is not the issue - it is one of only 4 activities he can choose to engage in.  But when a PK values roll playing over role playing and declares that he will follow the successful Flirt with the Duke's wife with an attempt to Seduce then he has chosen to run blithely into the minefield.  Now, if he had succeeded in his Courtesy roll he would have had the Archangel of Conscience sitting on his shoulder whispering that it is inappropriate to tell the Duke's wife that he appreciates her ample tracts of land and that they look ripe to be ploughed.  Having failed his roll, he is allowed to proceed with his ill chosen activity - and since the other PK's are seated away from the high table they are not there to intercede.

 

[Atgxtg]

33 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

It should be difficult to mess up at the high table, but when you let a bull loose in a china shop the result can be disaster.

Yes, it if it a bull. You intial explame did not indicate that your PK was misheavaing.

33 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

While the % of rolling a Crit remains the same, I know few players who feel better about trying to roll a 6 as opposed to a 16.  The likelihood may be the same statistically, but most players feel better with the latter target.

So? What difference doe it make how they feel about a die roll. It's a die roll not a relationship. 

33 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

 

  And I agree that the benefit of sitting near the salt is an improvement and I do not begrudge the characters this sort of bonus, but when you have a household knight with barely 3,000 Glory sitting alongside King Uther, Prince Madoc, Duke Gorlois and his wife, Duke Ulfius and the Duke of Lindsey and his extended family following the Battle of Lindsey then a PK should be aware of the social gulf that exists at the moment. 

 

Simply getting a Crit on APP should not place a knight of such low standing in the company of the King - and it is really egregious if a PK with APP 6 or less, no benefits from jewelry or attire, gets a Crit and then is granted a seat at the High Table because of his amazing beauty. Uhm, what??

 If you believe that "Simply getting a Crit on APP should not place a knight of such low standing in the company of the King" then don't put the knight there. You're the GM, your running the game. If you don't like a rule, you can change it. 

But what it look like, based upon your posts, is that you didn't like it that the PK would up "above the salt" so you took it out on the player. He didn't write the rules and it's not his fault that he rolled a critical.  

 

Also, as far as "a seat at the High Table" goes, the knight probably wasn't seated there. He was just seated somewhere near there. Depending on the size of the feast there could be many many knights there and he could be but one knight out of several hundred seated "above the salt". Most of a Liege lords friends are people beneath him in station and they usually sit near him at dinner. 

33 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

Mockery is not always pointing and laughing, sometimes it is as simple as commenting on the out of fashion attire, the poor grooming, or lack of standing.

Yes, and a knight can certainly take offense at that. Duels have been fought over someone commenting of the appearance of someone horse, and mocking your own vassals is not such a great idea. Most stories about traitors tend to involve thier being slighted in some fashion beforehand. 

33 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

  Court and Feasts are a form of combat all their own.  The situation between Uther and Gorlois is not unique to the 2 of them.  For instance, when the entire nobility of Logres is assembled do you think Duke Ulfius will not see the advantage of praising the Steward of Levcomgus - who has been excluded from this lofty gathering - at the expense of a household knight of one of Roderick's vassals? 

What advantage? Does Ulfrius want to get in on the feud between Levomagus and Salisbury, or escalate it? Best case scenario is that he causes Roderick to lose face and gets on Roderick's bad side.  Why would he want to aggravate Roderick? Is the something else going on?

 

Oh, and BTW, a clever PK or even Roderick could have replied that they were not surprised by the Stewards absence, he was absent at Countess Ellen's wedding too. 

33 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

 

The PK can not claim he was slighted, and Roderick can not fault Ulfius for praising his absent retainer, but the point is made none the less.  

Why can't he claim he was slighted? If a knight feels his honor has been sullied in some way he can opt to take offense. The feudal system was actually a two way street. Yes those higher got more than they gave, but there are many cases of vassals turning against a noble or even thier own liege over one of more slights, real or imagined. 

33 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

Flirting with the ladies of the high table is not the issue - it is one of only 4 activities he can choose to engage in.  But when a PK values roll playing over role playing and declares that he will follow the successful Flirt with the Duke's wife with an attempt to Seduce then he has chosen to run blithely into the minefield. 

Yup, but you didn't mention that part of things in your first post. Only that your PK got bored while seatred above the salt, and chose to flirt with the ladies at the table, which is in no means objectionable. 

33 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

Now, if he had succeeded in his Courtesy roll he would have had the Archangel of Conscience sitting on his shoulder whispering that it is inappropriate to tell the Duke's wife that he appreciates her ample tracts of land and that they look ripe to be ploughed. 

He probably shouldn't have needed a Courtesy roll to know that. That should have been automatic. Now did your player know better or not? Some people really don't. I've seen some people who don't really get the unacceptable behavior bit in real life, and some players joke around a lot, and are used to doing a lot of trash talking. I don't know the sort of players you have or what styleof play they are used to.

I once played in a D&D campaign where I was a knight of the king, and about 30 seconds after I met the other PCs one player started to insult and bad mouth the king right in front of me. I drew steal and was about the run the traitor through. Most of the D&Ders were outraged that I attacked a party member, and couldn't understand why I did it.. The other players whohad played Pendragon, understood exactly why I did it. But it was a clash of gaming styles.  

33 minutes ago, Uhtred said:

Having failed his roll, he is allowed to proceed with his ill chosen activity - and since the other PK's are seated away from the high table they are not there to intercede.

True, but maybe a NPC could have?

Again, I'm only commenting based on the information you've given but from that the character would have known his course of action was rude and inappropriate and had consequences, so the player should have been made aware of it as well. Now if the player did know what he was doing and decided to do it anyway, then he deserves what he gets. But it seems like he didn't. Such behavior is so out of place that it looks like a either lack of understanding or player apathy. Again I don't know the detail or context here, but it's such outrageous behavior that I have to wonder what the player was thinking. Then again, that's pretty much how Al Capone got his scar. 

[Sir Mad Munkee]

I was also thinking about this. I think one of the things that's missing from the idea of "I'll host a feast" is that it's not like throwing a dinner party today. Your guests, assuming they're knights and such, don't just rock up at 6pm, have a nice time at your table, and go home right after the desert course. They're your guests for days probably. That's got to cost a lot more than just the feast itself.So depending on the guests, I'd be tempted to slide the cost up or down, depending. Same goes for the Glory, really. Being above the salt at your own feast is a given – it's your high table after all – so shouldn't be worth much or any extra Glory. Your Glory comes from being the host, not where you sit, but being invited by Arthur to sit at the high table is obviously a big deal.

[Atgxtg]

3 hours ago, Sir Mad Munkee said:

I was also thinking about this. I think one of the things that's missing from the idea of "I'll host a feast" is that it's not like throwing a dinner party today. Your guests, assuming they're knights and such, don't just rock up at 6pm, have a nice time at your table, and go home right after the desert course. They're your guests for days probably. That's got to cost a lot more than just the feast itself.

There is probably some truth in that. Unless the guests are all close by, it might take a days to get to your place , and some people might show up a day early. I think most probably leave the next day. But that might be factored into the cost. A n average meal for someone of a knights station would cost a lot less than a feat would. Judging from the upkeep costs, probably less than 1£ per year, or about ¾d per day or ¼d for a meal. 

Since feats costs anywhere from 1d-16d per guest, so it would be easier to just assume that ¼d or ½d is included in the normal feats costs, especially since any left overs would no doubt be used up.