Jump to content
Sir Mad Munkee

Family history from 480?

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Hzark10 said:

There is plenty of options if you want to create a fresh perspective on the pre-Uther things.  We tried to make sure all the major characters were included and if the GM is willing to use YPMV rule, players could find themselves involved in a very different campaign. Who says Constantin did not have a child on the way unknown to everyone when he was killed?  There is nothing about his wife. Who says Riothamus dies when he goes off to Europe? Or Auerlius becomes Budec's legitimate heir and becomes King of Britanny instead and Uther is the one that invades in 466? Interesting ideas all around.  

I'd like to seize on this for a moment and ask if you might expand on the implications a bit. Because I was going to run a segment in which the PKs went off with Riothamus = Ambrosius and then help the High King return to Britain after his mainly continental army (returning from the campaign) gets crushed.

Sires, obviously, doesn't use this major hook, but if I send the PKs off with Riothamus I can still have them attempt to not die and get back in time for Windsor. 

So... what if Riothamus lived?

 

--Khanwulf

Share this post


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

Riothamus = Ambrosius

Bigger issue for SIRES is that Riothamus is NOT Ambrosius in SIRES, but the King of Domnonie. His death allows Idres to seize power in Domnonie and Cornwall, and also kicks off a war between Idres and Gorlois, without which you don't have the Duchy of Cornwall in its full extent, including Tintagel. So what this would mean in short term is that Britain would be stronger against the Saxons in 470s, since there is no side war going on in Cornwall, and Riothamus is instead a loyal ally. There is also less of a need for a war in Brittany, meaning that Riothamus would be able to rebuild his army much better. But whether this would be enough to tilt odds, who knows? Aurelius is more reactive than proactive in most of 470s, save for the Frisian campaign, which is already a success. The Cornish troops might not make a big difference, if they even get to the battlefield in time. It would be easy enough to kill Riothamus off by 480 at the latest and kick off the Cornish War then, a decade out of date. The only problem here is that Uther has no love for Gorlois, so he might step in earlier to try and rein Gorlois in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you get into the history of who the real King Arthur was, Riothamus is one of the names that many feel could have been the historical figure that King Arthur was based upon.  During my research, I ran into one account that said he did not die in that battle in Europe, but did not return to Cornwall either. Instead he was discovered to be ruling a small kingdom in Europe years later.  Regardless, he is NOT King Arthur and he dies, as most consider to the the truth, in that battle in Europe. 

"What-If's" can a basis for your own King Arthur campaign and game-masters/players should feel free to explore possibilities.  In my own shorter campaigns, one of the PKs, a female, did manage to have an affair with Prince Madoc and did sire a male child.  We ended the campaign at Baden, but the possibility of him pulling the sword was one of the questions that plague all of the players.

"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hzark10 said:

If you get into the history of who the real King Arthur was, Riothamus is one of the names that many feel could have been the historical figure that King Arthur was based upon.  During my research, I ran into one account that said he did not die in that battle in Europe, but did not return to Cornwall either. Instead he was discovered to be ruling a small kingdom in Europe years later.  Regardless, he is NOT King Arthur and he dies, as most consider to the the truth, in that battle in Europe. 

I've read the theory that Riothamus was Arthur and how he was betrayed by an ally and after losing a battle retreated to the French Avallon. I've even read accounts that claim Riothamus was Ambrosius and that Arthur was his successor, but I never ran across a story of Riothamus ruling a small kingdom in Europe years later. Which kingdom?

2 hours ago, Hzark10 said:

"What-If's" can a basis for your own King Arthur campaign and game-masters/players should feel free to explore possibilities.  In my own shorter campaigns, one of the PKs, a female, did manage to have an affair with Prince Madoc and did sire a male child.

One thing I would like to see is a Book of What If?s that explore some of these possibilities. Orignally, in KAP1, the game was less tied to Mallory. Camelot was not Winchester (I think it was Cadbury Hill but I'd have to check the map), and there was a bit more room for the Welsh/Celtic versions of Arthur and the Romano-British version. With later supplements and edtions Pendragon got more fleshed out, but also more tied to the Mallory version, and with SIRES now the HRB. All that is good, and adds depth to the game, but it would be nice to one day see a supplement (The Book of Arthurs?)  that explores some of the alternate versions of the tale. 

2 hours ago, Hzark10 said:

  We ended the campaign at Baden, but the possibility of him pulling the sword was one of the questions that plague all of the players."

As I've mentioned previous, for decades I've toyed with the idea of letting one of the PKs pull the Sword from the Stone and discovering that they were really Arthur, raised in secret. Although I'm not sure how well it would play out. The first few years are very difficult, and Arthur gets by mostly due to the aid he receives by some of the powerful KIngs, Knights, and of course Merlin. Merlin serves as a deus ex machina to save Arthur for the first half dozen years or so. But even so it would be quite challenging for a PK Arthur to pull a lot of stuff off. It could also be  tricky to run, since if young Arthur gets killed the campaign really goes off the rails. If young Arthur does survive, I see him evolving into more of a background character and the player being somewhat forced by circumstances to run another knight for adventuring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

but I never ran across a story of Riothamus ruling a small kingdom in Europe years later. Which kingdom?

Unfortunately, this was one of my sources that died on the internet. I ran across it once, took note that many were surprised by this claim, but then I could never find it again. As a result, I considered it not a reliable source and continued. I mentioned it as a possible source of YPMV if one wants to run a more robust Cornwall specific campaign. To conclude, Book of Sires established that Riothamus is NOT Arthur and dies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Hzark10 said:

To conclude, Book of Sires established that Riothamus is NOT Arthur and dies.

And to Khanwulf's point, Riothamus is also NOT Ambrosius / Aurelius in SIRES, either. That being said, you could easily enough send Aurelius to a continental campaign in 470 with Riothamus, and have Aurelius survive. You could even rename Riothamus to something else, and then pretend that your Aurelius is the Riothamus who gets his ass handed to him in Gaul, only that Aurelius survives the debacle. This would presumably cause some ripple effect on 471 and 472, since one would imagine Aurelius' prestige and manpower would take a hit, too. YPWV, as Greg was fond of saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

One thing I would like to see is a Book of What If?s that explore some of these possibilities. Orignally, in KAP1, the game was less tied to Mallory. Camelot was not Winchester (I think it was Cadbury Hill but I'd have to check the map), and there was a bit more room for the Welsh/Celtic versions of Arthur and the Romano-British version. With later supplements and edtions Pendragon got more fleshed out, but also more tied to the Mallory version, and with SIRES now the HRB. All that is good, and adds depth to the game, but it would be nice to one day see a supplement (The Book of Arthurs?)  that explores some of the alternate versions of the tale. 

I doubt there is enough support for something like a Book of What If/Arthurs. After all, as soon as you adopt a more radically different take on Arthur and the history, you end up tossing Book of Uther, Book of the Warlord, Book of the Estate, Book of Sires and, most importantly of all, GPC into the dust bin. And all the other ripple effects on published adventures etc. Not worth it.

Instead, you could (and I suspect you already have!) look at other games that do explore different Arthurs, like GURPS Camelot ( http://www.warehouse23.com/media/SJG30-6041_preview.pdf ) which does have Riothamus as Arthur, or Keltia ( http://cubicle7.co.uk/what-is-keltia/ ) or Mythic Britain ( https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/139443/Mythic-Britain ) or Age of Arthur ( https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/111752/Age-of-Arthur?src=hottest_filtered&filters=0_2140_140_0_0 ) for a more Dark Ages Celtic Mythos take. And I am sure I am missing some, too; I was trying to recall one that is basically a hard historical Subroman Britain setting, without the fantasy elements. Granted, I have not played any of the above nor even read the rulebooks, save for GURPS Camelot.

Mythic Britain uses RuneQuest 6 (Mythras) system ( http://thedesignmechanism.com/resources/TDM110 Mythras Imperative.pdf ), so it should be easy enough to hack to fit Pendragon or vice versa... Here is an adventure I found online, with a somewhat different Gawaine: http://thedesignmechanism.com/resources/Caves of the Circind.pdf

 

Share this post


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

I doubt there is enough support for something like a Book of What If/Arthurs. After all, as soon as you adopt a more radically different take on Arthur and the history, you end up tossing Book of Uther, Book of the Warlord, Book of the Estate, Book of Sires and, most importantly of all, GPC into the dust bin. And all the other ripple effects on published adventures etc. Not worth it.

I disagree. There are reason why Greg put the Pagan stuff in KAP to begin with. But over time, all the Pagan NPCs (Gawain, Merlin) have been converted to Christianity in order to conform with Mallory. Likewise place names, and even the location of Camelot. In fact it's gotten to the point where the Pagan aren't fitting in anymore, as their culture doesn't work in the more Medevalized Christian setting.

I do not believe that we have to have only one version of KAP. I'll even go so far as to say that the various editions and versions of things that have come out for the game prove that. While the core game mechanics haven't changed much since the games creation, they have changed. And that has already had ripple effects on published adventures. I didn't hear you objecting when they upped the manor income from £6 to £10, or when it went from 2L to £6 come to think of it. 

Asa far as tossing Book of.... whatever, many KAP GMs already do that. Quite a lot of KAP GM just use the core rule book and the whole "Book of" line is considered to be optional enhancements that aren't needed to play. 

I think by going with one version of the Arthurian tale to the exclusion of all others you limit the game and it doesn't need to be. A book of alternate takes and What-Ifs wouldn't conflict with establsihed stuff, becuase it would be know to be a book of What ifs.As for the other RPGS, I've got and read most of them, and they show just how much you can vary the core Myth and still have a King Arthur campaign. GRUPS Camleot in partiulcar, which sketched out more than one type of Arthur. All that stuff can be a great add to a GM who is looking to mix things up and vary one campaign from the previous, but I guess KAP 5.2 won't vary.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I've read the theory that Riothamus was Arthur and how he was betrayed by an ally and after losing a battle retreated to the French Avallon. I've even read accounts that claim Riothamus was Ambrosius and that Arthur was his successor, but I never ran across a story of Riothamus ruling a small kingdom in Europe years later. Which kingdom?

In this page,
https://thewildpeak.wordpress.com/tag/riothamus/
the author hypothesizes that Riothamus retires to Burgundy after his defeat in Europe. Maybe it, or a part of it, could be his kingdom?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

I do not believe that we have to have only one version of KAP. I'll even go so far as to say that the various editions and versions of things that have come out for the game prove that. While the core game mechanics haven't changed much since the games creation, they have changed. And that has already had ripple effects on published adventures. I didn't hear you objecting when they upped the manor income from £6 to £10, or when it went from 2L to £6 come to think of it. 

Asa far as tossing Book of.... whatever, many KAP GMs already do that. Quite a lot of KAP GM just use the core rule book and the whole "Book of" line is considered to be optional enhancements that aren't needed to play. 

Minor tinkering such as changing the accounting of the Manors to make them more consistent doesn't matter so much. Even though the 'sticker income' of the manor has increased from £6 to £10, the ordinary knightly upkeep is still £4+£2 for the family, like it was before the change. Besides, I can hardly object to it when I was one of the main guys pushing and implementing the change. :)

I'd be curious to hear more about the impact on published adventures... I do know that the skill (and Glory) levels have changed dramatically from 1st edition to 5th edition; for instance the Grey Knight adventure has Round Table Knights like Tor running around with skills more suitable for a beginning PK in 5th edition! However, once you fix the numbers, the society they present is compatible with the 5th edition setting still. But I wonder if you had other examples in mind to share?

I agree that Book of... line is optional (although some are more optional than others, IMHO), but the main point is that you end up scrapping the unified setting and GPC and adventures with alternative takes on Arthur. If Chivalry is not a thing and Arthur is just one of the regional warlords who are ambushing and raiding each other with spear-and-shield warbands measuring, at best, in a couple of hundred men, the society is radically different and the adventures that rely on a set of cultural assumptions of chivalry, amor, tournaments, travel, trade, etc, won't work anymore.

Note that I am not arguing that you shouldn't do something like that in your own game. Heck, I have run Rohan mini-campaign & Late Second Age Gondor campaign using KAP system, and it works just fine. But in neither case have I been able to use the published KAP setting & adventure material. I am simply expressing doubt that such a What-If book would gain traction, but then again, I am not an employee of Chaosium, so thankfully, these considerations are not my headache. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, mandrill_one said:

In this page,
https://thewildpeak.wordpress.com/tag/riothamus/
the author hypothesizes that Riothamus retires to Burgundy after his defeat in Europe. Maybe it, or a part of it, could be his kingdom?

Nice link, although it doesn't claim that Riothamus would be ruling the Kingdom of Burgundy. As far as I know, Riothamus vanishes from History, and we know the names & the descent of the Kings of the Burgundians during this time. There is no space for Riothamus in Burgundy, and it would be quite difficult to make another kingdom in the middle of Gaul, too. Not to mention, why would he? Especially if he is the High King in Britain (or even a King of Cornwall or Brittany), why wouldn't he return home rather than try to take over another kingdom with, at best, a defeated army that probably wants to go home as well? It is not as if he is a crusader in a far-away land, with the travel home too arduous, expensive and perilous undertaking.

Share this post


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

In this page,
https://thewildpeak.wordpress.com/tag/riothamus/
the author hypothesizes that Riothamus retires to Burgundy after his defeat in Europe. Maybe it, or a part of it, could be his kingdom?

Thanks. I've seen the stuff where it said that Riothamus retreats to Avallon, and sources that claim that he returned to Britian after that (which, if he could, would have make sense in the circumstances), butnot that he remained in "Gaul".  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Morien said:

Minor tinkering such as changing the accounting of the Manors to make them more consistent doesn't matter so much. Even though the 'sticker income' of the manor has increased from £6 to £10, the ordinary knightly upkeep is still £4+£2 for the family, like it was before the change. Besides, I can hardly object to it when I was one of the main guys pushing and implementing the change. :)

 

What about the change for 2L to £6 that came with the switch fromn KAP1 to KAP3? 

13 minutes ago, Morien said:

I'd be curious to hear more about the impact on published adventures... I do know that the skill (and Glory) levels have changed dramatically from 1st edition to 5th edition; for instance the Grey Knight adventure has Round Table Knights like Tor running around with skills more suitable for a beginning PK in 5th edition! However, once you fix the numbers, the society they present is compatible with the 5th edition setting still. But I wonder if you had other examples in mind to share?

Yeah, Grey Knight is a good example. here are some of the changes Oh, and I do want to point out that I'm not necessairly opposed to these changes. I think that most of the changes, if not all,  improved the overall game, although I also think that in some cases we lost something in the process.

Economics: In addition to the increase in the upkeep for Knights, there is a change from the old libra/money system to a manor system, that came with KAP3. The was accompanies by a shift from PK being household knights who hoped to one day get their own manor to landed knights 

Squires: PK squires went from being a sort of "paying your dues" bit in KAP1 to pretty much being discarded in KAP5, then it was brought back as an optional rule in both K&L and BotEnt

Hunting: Hunts used to be brutal. In my  KAP1 campaign, deer killed off  more PKS than anything else. When attacked, animals would fight back, and most were as skilled or better skilled than the PKs. Red Deer were Skill 18 and did 5d6+7 damage, pretty much a major wound to a hunter.  Now knights typically get a free attack, most animals try to flee, and chargen ensures the PKs have much better skill with hunting weapons, such as the greatspear/boarspear than before. Now if a PK died in a hunt, something must have gone seriously wrong.

Culture: All the Culture and Language skills were dropped. This had several effects. First off the elimination of those skills means starting PKS have more points to spend elsewhere. It also ensures that PKs can converse and interact with characters from other cultures, where before there was often a language barrier. Overall this was a good change. However, I do wish there were Lore skills, like Saxon Lore, Cymric Lore, Pict Lore, i\along the lines of Folk Lore and Faerie Lore to help differentiate and add color to the various cultures. 

Game Mechanics: If KAP1 a higher roll beat a lower one, even if the lower one was a critical. 

Glory: Back in KAP1 when you defeated a Knight you got Glory equal to 1/10th of his total. This was changed later, probably to prevent massive glory inflation. I could easy see (and did in fact see) it spiral out of control. Still it was nice to have the glory aware directly tied to the glory of the knight. I wonder if a 1/100th rule would work. It's pretty much what the table does. Buyt, on the other hand, there are a lot mor ways to pick up glory now, and higher traits and passions, so glory levels have generally increased.   

Back in KAP1 the PK who had 8,000 Glory was really something. Now it's not so hard to get. 

Chirugery: If KAP1 if the Chirugeon didn't make thier roll, then the injured character not only took damage, but they didn't get their Healing Rate for the week. Now they doi. That's a huge change, as now character will tend to break even on a failed chuirgery roll. 

Boosted Chargen: Back in KAP1 PKs started with everything either rolled randomly, or at the default value, with a handful of points to spend to customize thing. Often PKs would have to age their characters for several years just to qualify for knighthood. The loyalty (Lord) 15 was a toughie. As a result, many young knights were much less skilled, and certianly were more focused in their abilities. Most PKs barely qualified for Knighthood, and would focus on one to two key skills at first and work on the other over time. Even so they rarely had the time, glory, or experience to be really good at many things.  By comparsion, PKs in KAP5 pretty much start out at 15 in Sword, Lance and Horsemanship, which would have taken a few years.

Power Level: As you pointed out with Grey Knight, the overall skill and power level of the game has taken a dramatic shift, no doubt because after playing the game for awhile, the skills of PKs ended up being much better than what was initially expected. YOU can see this with the alternate NPK knight stats that came out in Torunament of Dreams (I think) that were an upgrade from the default NPC stats. As the game got less lethal, and as the players learned more about how to play the game the idea of just what was an average or typical value changed. If you look as the same character writeups for Arthur, Merlin, and such from the various editions you will see a big shift in Glory and skill levels. The average attribute, and skill level of a knight has gone up, and most KAP5 PKs can walk over most KAP1 characters.

Lethality/Ease of Play: Overall the game has gotten much, much easier on the players many of the rule changes I've noted here contribute to that, but just to put some of them into context

  • Giving PKs thier own manors and started them off married helps to ensure that PKs will start a family line, something that wasn't that common in KAP1
  • The critical=20 ruyle helped PKs to defeat superior adversaries
  • The modifiers to traits and passions improved the PKS chances of securing bonuses, glory and inspiration
  • The updated hunting rules made hunts far less lethal
  • The change to Chirugery didn't quite eliminate the lingering death, but it make it much more a case of bad luck than the possible (or even likely) outcome of a serious injury. 

 

13 minutes ago, Morien said:

I agree that Book of... line is optional (although some are more optional than others, IMHO),

I agree, some are more optional than other.  But, also the Book of...line also contradicts parts of the main rulebook and each other (for instance the nerwest armor values, manor incomes, number of knights in Salisbury, and alternate rules for PK squires), yet the game survives. 

13 minutes ago, Morien said:

but the main point is that you end up scrapping the unified setting and GPC and adventures with alternative takes on Arthur. If Chivalry is not a thing and Arthur is just one of the regional warlords who are ambushing and raiding each other with spear-and-shield warbands measuring, at best, in a couple of hundred men, the society is radically different and the adventures that rely on a set of cultural assumptions of chivalry, amor, tournaments, travel, trade, etc, won't work anymore.

Not necessarily. A Romanized Arthur or a Cletic one could keep many of the same elements. Yes it might mean diverging from the GPC, but the GPC is supposed to be a guide, not a a straitjacket.  Greg himself diverged from Mallory several times with the adventures he included in the game. The Troit Boar for instance. 

 

13 minutes ago, Morien said:

Note that I am not arguing that you shouldn't do something like that in your own game. Heck, I have run Rohan mini-campaign & Late Second Age Gondor campaign using KAP system, and it works just fine. But in neither case have I been able to use the published KAP setting & adventure material. I am simply expressing doubt that such a What-If book would gain traction, but then again, I am not an employee of Chaosium, so thankfully, these considerations are not my headache. :)

I think that there are a lot of good Celtic and Romanized Arthur adventures that could be worth incorporating into KAP. Most would't require a radical departure from the GPC or anything like that. Knights and the manor system grew out of the old Roman Equestians and their Villa estates, so I don't thing we need to be exclusive in content. 

I do think one thing that does need to be looked at again and addressed in Pagaism. As the game has gotten more Norman-High Medieval in culture Paganism is become more problematic in game. I do think some of the social norms that came with/from the Christian Church need to be toned down or reduced in lands that have a strong Pagan following. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would really like to voice an opinion against a book of What if's... not because it doesn't sound cool, or interesting, or exactly like something I would explore, but because this isn't one of the other game houses pushing out a supplement a month and rule book every quarter.  Perhaps scheduling for things will pick up in the near future with Chaosium and we will see more than one book a year, but this isn't the sort of thing I would want to see them devoting time to.  

A book of What if's will, by it's very nature, never be finished as people new to the game postulate possibilities based on their knowledge of the history, the writings, and the myths.  Even cultural interpretations will cause ripples in the story line, so people will always complain that this should have been included, or that should go this way.  The What if's/Arthurs are expertly delved in to in settings like here on this forum, where the voices of experience can share their knowledge - whether it is based on previous iterations of the game, history backgrounds, or knowledge of the various writers who have laid the foundation for KAP.  As a gamer, this is a great time to be playing games because for once WE have the ability to reach each other and discuss alterations to the system, or the storyline; to ping pong ideas and open ourselves to paths we hadn't previously considered - all without the game designers being involved directly, or disturbing their developmental work.  

Share this post


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

And to Khanwulf's point, Riothamus is also NOT Ambrosius / Aurelius in SIRES, either. That being said, you could easily enough send Aurelius to a continental campaign in 470 with Riothamus, and have Aurelius survive. You could even rename Riothamus to something else, and then pretend that your Aurelius is the Riothamus who gets his ass handed to him in Gaul, only that Aurelius survives the debacle. This would presumably cause some ripple effect on 471 and 472, since one would imagine Aurelius' prestige and manpower would take a hit, too. YPWV, as Greg was fond of saying.

Interesting idea Morien: getting my cake and eating it too. I was going to leave Uther to mess up relations with the northern lords while Ambrosius got his tush kicked by the Visigoths--it would help to explain why Uther is loathed outside of Logres. Note: all this is "was going to", before Sires went to great length to address some of my setup concerns.

Really my main issue with Ambrosius hanging around Britain is... why would the Saxons rebel against their peace oaths and rise up to raid at that time? They got the ever-lovin' heck bashed out of them 3-4 years before (counting mobilization times), in the early equivalent to Baden, and to me it would take a real, glaring opportunity to rouse them and dare a revenge raid. Sure, Hengest's boys might want to prove themselves, but they had their own chiefdoms under their dad for some time already.

So... if Ambrosius took a bunch of men off and was rumored to be killed along with his army, that to me sounds like real opportunity.

If Riothamus != Ambrosius, and Riothamus is said to be dead as well, plunging untouched Cornwall into meyhem, then that IS an opportunity--to strike up the Thames and into the heart of richest Britain.

The Saxons get stopped at Windsor, while winning the battle handily. What? Stopped? Why? My theory is that they discovered Ambrosius was still alive, got his army together and lost, but had enough pull to continue the mobilization and fall back to building Ambrosius' Dike. At this the Saxons decided to just take what they could get and retire with glory intact. Ambrosius doesn't have to be a militarily awesome king: he's a Good king, not a Great one. Uther is Great not Good, and Arthur is both.

So anyway, I'll see how this all goes.

 

--Khanwulf

Share this post


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

I was going to leave Uther to mess up relations with the northern lords

Heh. That actually happens in 478-479, while Aurelius is busy with his Frisian campaign. And explains why Uther has such an uphill battle to get to High Kingship; a diplomat he is not. ;)

In SIRES, only Nohaut and Deira make a peace treaty with Aurelius; Kent does not. Aurelius loses his Continental mercenaries after 469, and many of his veterans go off with Riothamus to die in that ill-fated campaign, which is why he can't simply stomp Kent out. With Cornwall turning from an ally into a distraction, and Kent getting additional reinforcements from the Continent, Aesc launches an invasion up the Thames valley in 473. It is a hard fought battle, albeit ultimately a defeat for the Britons, hence setting up also the Uther - Gorlois rivalry/hatred as Uther blames Gorlois for not bringing his knights to the fight (Gorlois being busy in a war against Idres). The initiative shifts to the Saxons with lots of raiding.

That being said, your variant could work as well, although I would expect that Kent would be more aggressive in 471-2 already; surely Aurelius' personal involvement in the Gaulish Campaign means more of his veterans go with him. This would strip more men from Logres, and with Uther's less than diplomatic ways, probably he would have harder time to muster the nobles, especially the semi-independent kings. He is no High King, after all. I have hard time believing, though, that Aurelius would stay missing for 3 years. But I could see him missing for a year, allowing the balance to shift (as above) and for Kent to tell their kinsmen in the Continent that Britain is ripe for the taking, hence the big influx of more Saxons in 473.

With Aurelius rumored dead, though, it becomes harder to justify Octa and Eosa staying calm during the 470s. After all, they still have their armies mainly intact. Although I guess that if Aurelius is returning in 471 already, Octa and Eosa can quickly scrap their plans of Malahaut invasion for the summer. In my headcanon, I have them remaining peaceful out of two reasons: 1) They did take oaths to Aurelius (which is also the excuse why they do rebel in 480s; Aurelius is dead so they are freed from those oaths). 2) 'Sibling' rivalry: if they help Aesc stomp the Britons, Aesc will be reaping most of the Glory and benefits, while Octa and Eosa have to bend knee to him. This is the flipside of why I have Aelle staying calm during 516-517; he doesn't want to help the New Saxon invaders to Malahaut, but prefers Arthur and them whittling each other down, so that he can sweep them off the board afterwards. And it almost works: he is the Bretwalda of all the Saxons of Britain at Badon Hill.

But in the end, it would be your story to tell. :)

Edited by Morien

Share this post


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

With Aurelius rumored dead, though, it becomes harder to justify Octa and Eosa staying calm during the 470s. After all, they still have their armies mainly intact.

Well according to the sources, the Saxons suffered heavy casualties against Aurelius at Masbeli and Kaer Conan (Coinsborough), so while Octa and Esoa might still have intact armies, few of the other Saxon leaders at the time did.  So thet might not have had the manpower, and by the time they got more Saxons in from home, Aurielius returned. 

This could help to explain why Aelle is so successful and gives Aurelius what appears to be his only defeat. If he was supposed to come over to help Octa and Eosa in 471-72 but had to hold off for several years following Aurelius return, then he might have been especially prepared for the invasion. This could also explain why Alee doesn't seem to be all that fond of OCta and Eosa, too. Maybe they pulled out of an alliance at the last minute?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Uhtred said:

I would really like to voice an opinion against a book of What if's... not because it doesn't sound cool, or interesting, or exactly like something I would explore, but because this isn't one of the other game houses pushing out a supplement a month and rule book every quarter.  Perhaps scheduling for things will pick up in the near future with Chaosium and we will see more than one book a year, but this isn't the sort of thing I would want to see them devoting time to.  

That's a valid argument, up to a point. Yes, they tend to be slower with releases that some of the other companies. Of course they don't put out as many "garbage" supplements as some companies too. 

But it's not like they only work on one product at a time anymore. There are several supplements "in the pipeline" that are apparently very close to being completed. So then it becomes a case of "what next?". As far as I know there is the Book of Castles, the Book of Magicians, and the Book of Salsibury in the KAP pipeline. Then there are probably a few supplements that I don't know about.

But assuming the stuff it the woks all gets released, what then?

I for one would love a KAP Beastiary (Book of the Beast or Book of the Hunt?) Something that compiles the existing stats for things we've seen over the years and puts them all into one resource. Maybe give a couple SIZ variants like they did with giants, and in Lordly Domains. 

Something on Horses would be nice. It might not be full "Book of.." Size but at bring back the detail given from previous editions. 

Some new adventures would be nice. Technically, I don't think there has been any official KAP adventures other than what in the rulebook, the back of SIRES, and, of course, the GPC. But published adventures tend to be the lifeblood of an RPG. 

I'd love to see them detail each county like Salisbury is apparently going to be, but just to cover all of Logres would take quite some time, let alone all of Britain, so that seems unlikely. . 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I for one would love a KAP Beastiary (Book of the Beast or Book of the Hunt?) Something that compiles the existing stats for things we've seen over the years and puts them all into one resource. Maybe give a couple SIZ variants like they did with giants, and in Lordly Domains. 

Something on Horses would be nice. It might not be full "Book of.." Size but at bring back the detail given from previous editions.  

The above two would be easily combined into a single book. After all, horses are beasties, too, and it would give this hypothetical Book of the Beasts some additional material to make it more interesting. It would probably need some more than just the size variants and variety of horses, though. Updated hunting rules, perhaps, and a couple of beast related adventures?

19 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Some new adventures would be nice. Technically, I don't think there has been any official KAP adventures other than what in the rulebook, the back of SIRES, and, of course, the GPC. But published adventures tend to be the lifeblood of an RPG. 

Oh, fully agreed there. There is the Marriage of Count Roderick, but it is admittedly more of a string of short yearly solos to enliven the campaign than an adventure by itself. Of course there is the host of 'Tales of...' series and the regional books with adventures from previous editions, too, which is what I am primarily drawing on for adventures, especially in Romance and after. Having some new adventures would be nice, though.

19 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

I'd love to see them detail each county like Salisbury is apparently going to be, but just to cover all of Logres would take quite some time, let alone all of Britain, so that seems unlikely. . 

Probably the bigger issue is the maps going down to manor-level, or worse, hamlet level. A quick few page blurb on the ruling family and a couple of main NPKs and ladies and clerics would be easy enough, but a full book on every county? That is way too much.

That being said, I for one would like to see more regional books, like I have said. Some of these were published, at least in part, in previous editions, like Perilous Forest covering pretty much the whole of Cumbria, and Savage Mountains doing Cambria. But both of those treated the regions more like places for the PKs to visit and adventure in, and then go home to Salisbury/Logres, rather than actually being from the region.

Instead, I'd like to see regional books that detail the starting location at least to the level of Salisbury in KAP 5.2, including family history, and then give me support to running GPC from that region instead of Salisbury. Including some local adventures, which can be adapted to outside knights as well. For example, Cameliard and Lothian would be very interesting places to start from, and get very little attention in GPC. Even Savage Mountains and Beyond the Wall pretty much gloss over these regions, and more importantly, are already set in Conquest/Romance phases, a good generation or two after the official starting date. For more Logres-centric game, Lindsey looks like a very interesting region as well, although admittedly it 'suffers' a bit from having its Duke survive, and hence Anarchy is not nearly as interesting as in Salisbury. But granted, you could make the same claim about Cameliard and Lothian as well, and at least in Lindsey, you'd certainly feel the Saxon pressure a lot more, not to mention Malahaut looking at your lands pretty hungrily as well. Speaking of Malahaut, it and Cornwall would be additional interesting starting places, and in Cornwall's case, you could cover both the Duchy of Cornwall and the Kingdom of Cornwall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Morien said:

The above two would be easily combined into a single book. After all, horses are beasties, too, and it would give this hypothetical Book of the Beasts some additional material to make it more interesting. It would probably need some more than just the size variants and variety of horses, though. Updated hunting rules, perhaps, and a couple of beast related adventures?

Yeah. Lordly Domains did something like that, and could be a good frame to work from. Plus a good medeival beastiary would include heradic and magical beasts too, and probably soem alternate version both in SIZ  (for instance a dragon the size of a large horse, similar to what we see in most period illustrations)and in capabilities based on origin (i.e Celtic Dragons vs. Norse). Perhaps a system to randomize attributes and skills a little. THat could all help to flesh out such a book.  

25 minutes ago, Morien said:

 Having some new adventures would be nice, though.

It's the lifesblood of most RPGs. But, in defense of the powers that be, its' not like they are opposed to new adventures. It was one of the things Greg was asking for, and I think they were planning on a book of short adventure ideas, similar to what was done with Prince Valiant (a great resource for KAP).

25 minutes ago, Morien said:

Probably the bigger issue is the maps going down to manor-level, or worse, hamlet level. A quick few page blurb on the ruling family and a couple of main NPKs and ladies and clerics would be easy enough, but a full book on every county? That is way too much.

Well, too much is terms of a realistic expectation for something we could expect to see in out lifetimes. Regional books, at Salsibury level are a lot more reasonable, especially if they use Savage Mountains, Beyond the Wall, and such as a starting point, as the maps and key locations shouldn't change all that much., Maybe do a small area down to a manor or two just to highlight regional differences. That's seems feasibly possible. 

25 minutes ago, Morien said:

 For example, Cameliard and Lothian would be very interesting places to start from, and get very little attention in GPC. 

Maybe a handful of place, such as Cameliard, Lothian and Cornwall could be  given a more extensive treatment? Once thing I'd like to see would be the region trait and passion modifiers explained. SIRES does help with some of that, but sometime you don't know why knights from one place are more brave than those from someplace else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Morien and Atgxtg! Instead of cluttering this post with reference quotes I'll just dig in:

SIRES does address many of the setup issues with Uther, and lays the foundation for his disagreement with Gorlois. My Pendragon will vary: I want to make Gorlois younger, roughly Ambrosius' age, and contemporary expatriate in Brittany. The two were quite close, making Uther the jealous younger brother. Ygraine I've already introduced differently, in 467, so I'm not going to walk that back but it creates a rivalry story between Ambrosius and Gorlois for her hand--and in which she ultimately (given her head by her father, King of Galvoie) chooses Gorlois because he will "be hers entire, while as queen of the High King she will be but one rose amongst the thorns."

Uther, who never actually meets her during this period, further hates Gorlois for refusing to bow out of what he thinks should be Ambrosius' kingly perogative.

If --and I've not decided fully yet-- I send Ambrosius along with Riothamus, Uther can make a hash of things up north early on. Some years later Ambrosius would give him another chance during the Frisian campaign and he blows it again. For all this I'm taking a page from some scholars who point out that Britain's manpower reserves at the time would be in the north (and Cornwall), so when Ambrosius takes his mercenaries and the flower of nascent British knighthood to the Visigothic maw, he's counting on the experienced warriors of the north to keep the Saxons honest to their oaths.

When news gets back that the army is lost and everyone is dead (471) there is great mourning--except among the sons of Hengest, who are now free to do what their thegns want and raid for revenge. They put out word to the Continent, muster their army and in spring 473 set up the Thames... only to find out that Ambrosius just got back, heard the Saxons were on the move, and scrounged up another army from the south. Result is Windsor. Ambrosius spent a year in Burgundy trying to extricate his mauled troops, before giving up and letting the Burgundian king land his continentals in exchange for enough gold to take ship from Arelate (Arles) in the south and around back to Britain. Excuses here are: it takes the PKs on a bit of a whistlestop tour outside Britain, including a potentially fatal battle, has them meeting people they otherwise wouldn't, and removes them from Britain when they might otherwise meddle in the Cornwall Civil War. 

Or I might just skip everything and let the PKs meddle in said war.

 

I really like the thought that Aelle intended to join the Sons of Hengest and missed the battle, deciding to cool it a few years and land with a plan. Or... he didn't miss the battle, but left and came back with more men. In my head, his success is because he provoked Ambrosius/Uther to chase him along the coast toward Pevensey, then sent his Kentish reinforcements to land behind the British and threaten their camp. Result was Ambrosius retreating into the Anderida and digging a defensive ditch to overnight (later to be called "Malfosse" by annoyed Norman historians). Meanwhile Aelle looks at the situation and cannily decides to parley.

 

--Khanwulf     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2019 at 11:13 AM, Atgxtg said:

I for one would love a KAP Beastiary (Book of the Beast or Book of the Hunt?) Something that compiles the existing stats for things we've seen over the years and puts them all into one resource. Maybe give a couple SIZ variants like they did with giants, and in Lordly Domains. 

Something on Horses would be nice. It might not be full "Book of.." Size but at bring back the detail given from previous editions. 

Some new adventures would be nice. Technically, I don't think there has been any official KAP adventures other than what in the rulebook, the back of SIRES, and, of course, the GPC. But published adventures tend to be the lifeblood of an RPG.

I'll second that: a Book of the Hunt would be extremely useful for breathing the same life into hunting that Book of Feasts did for ... um, feasting. In fact, you could apply the same card mechanics if you wanted to.

Then, jazz the book up with a bestiary, discussion of the role of meat acquisition and conservation in noble society, and horses. End with a few hunting mini-adventures. That would be a product well worth the money.

--Khanwulf

Share this post


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

I'll second that: a Book of the Hunt would be extremely useful for breathing the same life into hunting that Book of Feasts did for ... um, feasting. In fact, you could apply the same card mechanics if you wanted to.

Well, cards could replace the prey and obstacles tables.  Maybe cards could have a critter's stats on it, and/or some sort of obstacle roll. If we allowed for varible sized beasts, ala Lordly Domains, the deck could handle all which size beasties one finds too. Hunters who make their roll could probably get a good idea of the SIZ based upon the size of the tracks. 

1 hour ago, Khanwulf said:

Then, jazz the book up with a bestiary, discussion of the role of meat acquisition and conservation in noble society, and horses. End with a few hunting mini-adventures. That would be a product well worth the money.

--Khanwulf

Book of the Beast? 

Add in:

  • A method for randomizing beast stats somewhat. Even if it s just some guidelines or a short table with modifiers based on SIZ. 
  • Horse training rules
  • Hawk and Dog training rule too. 
  • Probably something for breeding animals to get or keep desired traits (like faster bigger or stronger horses). 
  • Probably stats for a few different breeds of some animals

Maybe this idea is worth it's own thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Maybe this idea is worth it's own thread?

Yeah it probably is. I mean you could define a decent feature list and estimate wordcount. That could be enough for the Chaosium to decide if its worth sourcing text and doing a KS?

 

--Khanwulf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

Yeah it probably is. I mean you could define a decent feature list and estimate wordcount. That could be enough for the Chaosium to decide if its worth sourcing text and doing a KS?

 

--Khanwulf

Okay, I'm game to start kicking the can down the road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×