Jump to content
Sir Mad Munkee

Family history from 480?

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Hzark10 said:

Ah, but his son will turn up in a few years....

You could naturally let it die by lowering it one a year, make it non-inheritable as the object is long gone, transfer it to another person, or transform it into a directed trait: suspicious of the high king, or leave it as is.  "Don't get grandpa started on Vortigern. We'll be here all night listening to it." Perhaps trait divided by 5, rounded up, for value.

I did not purposely seek an answer to that question, but I did ask it. And I forgot about following up on it later.

I always give the player the choice for the son. He can either take the passion or may even choose to pick a lower one or none. It gives some depth into the character. Did you agree with your father or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Cornelius said:

I always give the player the choice for the son. He can either take the passion or may even choose to pick a lower one or none. It gives some depth into the character. Did you agree with your father or not.

Makes sense as a way to inherit passions in general. But my question was more: does a specific passion targeting a dead person even make sense (while irrelevant), or do you modify the passion in some way, to make it e.g. Hate (Vortigern's line) or something similar?

In this specific case it didn't seem to make much sense, since "Vortigern's line" also includes his son who led the rebels...

Edited by Sir Mad Munkee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sir Mad Munkee said:

Makes sense as a way to inherit passions in general. But my question was more: does a specific passion targeting a dead person even make sense (while irrelevant), or do you modify the passion in some way, to make it e.g. Hate (Vortigern's line) or something similar?

I would probably keep them around, especially if they are 16+. It could affect the roleplay even after death. Aside of the example given by Hzark think of the following situations:

- You speak with a group of former vassals of Vortigern and the topic of their liege comes up. your hatred probably influences the discussion and heated words (or even challenges) may be the result of it.

- You need the support of another knight and need to convince him. You know he (or his family) was slighted by Vortigern in the past. Your hatred may be beneficialin this case as you can spent some time by the fire swapping stories. 

The passion could change to something else, but I would let that be decided by roleplay. If the PK is acting and speaking as the line of Vortigern is tainted, then yeah the hatred could become Hate (Vortigern's line) or if he speaks ill of all those who followed that vile king then it could become Hate (Vortigern's followers) or something like that.

Of course during the course of the years the hatred could decrease, but I would also discuss this with the player. It depends a bit on how the PK keeps his hatreds alive. 

For me KAP is a game of passions and they are not so easily dismissed, but a lot depends on how the player roleplays it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I generally let the Hate die with the hated person's demise. I mean, by the time the PKs themselves are forming memories (5+ years), the boogieman is Hengest and his Saxons, not Vortigern. Sure, Paschent comes back in 479, but he dies in 480, so very little potential interaction with PKs. By the time Cerdic comes around, Hate Saxons is probably more alive and well than Hate Vortigern. But I would definitely entertain the idea of giving a PK whose father fought against Vortigern (especially if there was Hate Vortigern at any level) a directed trait: Suspicious of Cerdic. But again, I think Hate Saxons would taint that well already.

Vortigern's line is a bit more problematic, as both the kings of Escavalon and Powys trace their lineage back to Vortigern via Vortimer and Katigern, respectively. And those guys were heroes, as far as most of the Cymri are concerned.

Finally, I have a GM's objection to people getting Glory for Passions that are defunct. That being said, I WOULD allow a player to carry Love Wife in the character sheet as a reason for the PK to refuse to remarry. That way, there is a cost and behavior associated with the Passion. Hate Vortigern, alas, would not make the cut for me. There simply isn't the Loyalist-Rebel split anymore after Vortigern's death. The most hardcore loyalists already die during 466 - 468, and the rest are happy enough to unite against the Saxons.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sir Mad Munkee said:

modify the passion in some way, to make it e.g. Hate (Vortigern's line) or something similar?

I would not necessarily change it to the lineage as you correctly point out, both Katigern and Vortimer, Vortigern's sons by his first wife, rebel against the father.  Vortimer does so twice.  So, Hate (Vortigern) would not transfer to Hate (Vorigern's family).  Vortimer is actually made King of Logres for successfully throwing the Saxons out.

One aspect of Book of Sires has, is the potential of being a "GPC" for campaigns starting in 439. In this case, this Passion would play out very much. But, as background, the gamemaster should decide on how to handle this and similar Passions where the object of the passion dies, or similarly is removed from the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 8:47 AM, Hzark10 said:

I would not necessarily change it to the lineage as you correctly point out, both Katigern and Vortimer, Vortigern's sons by his first wife, rebel against the father.  Vortimer does so twice.  So, Hate (Vortigern) would not transfer to Hate (Vorigern's family).  Vortimer is actually made King of Logres for successfully throwing the Saxons out.

 

On 3/6/2019 at 8:47 AM, Hzark10 said:

One aspect of Book of Sires has, is the potential of being a "GPC" for campaigns starting in 439. In this case, this Passion would play out very much. But, as background, the gamemaster should decide on how to handle this and similar Passions where the object of the passion dies, or similarly is removed from the game.

Oh yeah! Since I started my current campaign in 410 AD, the Book of Sires, is going to be just that for my campaign. I have plans for the PKs to transport Prince Aurelius and Prince Uther to Brittany.  My PKs just met Vortigern for the first time in 424, last game session. 

As far a removing passions after they have "run their course" in the campaign, I was thinking of giving the PKs Forgiving rolls during the Winter Phase to let them reduce the Passion (Success= 1 point, Critical Success =2 points, Failure = No Change, Fumble = Roll Vengeful and increase the passion on a success or critical).  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/5/2019 at 10:54 PM, Sir Mad Munkee said:

Definitely. I've always disliked that first adventure feeling of "Boom! Here you suddenly are in the game world, with no history or context." Compared to that, after just chargen I've now got lots of hooked in details in my campaign:

  • The possible return of the PK's father who disappeared in 457.
  • Old knights greeting the PKs with remarks like, "ah yes, you're Jareth's boy! Pity we lost him at Maisbeli."
  • We got two very high Passions - Hate (Cambrian tribesmen) and Hate (Cumbrian tribesmen) - so I'm looking forward to the first freakouts over the Welsh and Picts. Nice to see, instead of everyone having Hate (Saxons) only, and "the bastards supported that traitor Vortigern at Carlion!" makes a better explanation than "doesn't everyone hate Saxons?"
  • One PK was exiled to Brittany, his mother's homeland (I was rolling locations on Table 1.2, if they decided it was a love marriage), and took on a great deal of the culture in his ideas, even requesting ermine in his coat of arms, as it's the Brittany coat.
  • One player rolled the ancient bronze sword on the Luck table, and immediately slotted it into the history of who his grandfather had been fighting, and even added it to his heraldry (along with an embattled per fess division, representing the stunning amount of garrison duty dad did).
  • We had a rare, lettered grandfather who gave Constans a book (rolled "did something notable" at the coronation in 442 and chose the Read skill), took it very personally when the boy was murdered, and became a Dissident as soon as he could.

And much more. The whole thing added a lot of connections and richness. 👌

Actually, that reminds me of a question: what do you do with Passions like Hate (Vortigern)? I just included it as colour, but he's dead and crispy, so there's not much to pass down to the PK...

Vortigern has many descendants...

(including me).

Seriously, though, the Vortigernids were the dominant dynasty of Powys, at least the western, mountainous area (Sugales) in Pendragon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/6/2019 at 2:08 AM, Sir Mad Munkee said:

The early death was grandfather 6,299 (married very well & died early, but gloriously), and the father was 2,270 (disappeared in 457, he'll be back). Oddly enough that was also the highest for a grandfather in the whole run, despite dying in 439 at Carlion (was mistaken about it being Parrett).

6299? That doesn't sound right...

The absolute maximum this Grandfather should have is: 300 (inherited) + 1000 (knighted) + 200 (vassal knight) + 400 (married) + 180 (9d20 from previous years) + 180 (Battle of Carlion) + 1000 (heroic death at Carlion) = 3260. How did you get to 6299???

That aside, I am actually curious about the whole distribution of Glory of the PK ancestors, not just the highest one. How much did the other PK ancestors get?

Share this post


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

Vortigern has many descendants...

(including me).

Seriously, though, the Vortigernids were the dominant dynasty of Powys, at least the western, mountainous area (Sugales) in Pendragon.

Congratulations on your ancestry.

Vortigern, in Book of Sires, seems like the grand enemy.  But, there is another side to him that I hope to eventually show.  It was Hengest who betrayed Vortigern and the Cymri.

Share this post


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

Congratulations on your ancestry.

Vortigern, in Book of Sires, seems like the grand enemy.  But, there is another side to him that I hope to eventually show.  It was Hengest who betrayed Vortigern and the Cymri.

I got the impression that despite his plotting and betrayal to get the High Kingship, he actually starts off trying to do the right things and be a good King. It's just that after he meet Rowena he is besotted and neglects his duties and just lets Hengest have his way. 

I think that after Long Knives he realizes just what's happening, but by then he alienated most of the the Brits,. and  it's too late for him to get out of mess he's in. I think he would have liked to come to an arrangement of some sorts with Aurelius to fight against the Saxons, but Aurelius won't go for it because Vortigern's was responsible for the  murder of Aurelius' father and elder brother. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, you got it pretty well correct.  Depending on which version of his history you are drawing from, he had some religious problems, but the moving of tribes early on were meant to stop the Irish who were the main enemy on the west side of Cambria. Hengest, as Vortigern's father-in-law would definitely have influence.

Share this post


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

Yeah, you got it pretty well correct.  Depending on which version of his history you are drawing from, he had some religious problems, but the moving of tribes early on were meant to stop the Irish who were the main enemy on the west side of Cambria. Hengest, as Vortigern's father-in-law would definitely have influence.

That's good, I'm getting to the point in the campaign where he is going to be showing up. Itr looks like he got chewed out by Germanus for sleeping with his own daughter, and was possibly involved in the whole Pelagianism controversy.  In many ways he reminds of KAP 5+ Uther, but with a bit more political savvy but less military ability. Both seem to be a bit too proud, lustful and full of themselves to really succeed at being a good king. 

It makes him a bit more sympathetic and tragic in that he could have been a good king if he knew in 435 or even 445 what he knew in 465. He could have handled Hengest.

 

Share this post


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

Yeah, you got it pretty well correct.  Depending on which version of his history you are drawing from, he had some religious problems, but the moving of tribes early on were meant to stop the Irish who were the main enemy on the west side of Cambria. Hengest, as Vortigern's father-in-law would definitely have influence.

I think that a case could be made for Vortigern viewing the Irish, the enemy of the Romano-Britons for centuries, as the more significant threat than loyal Germanic mercenaries, often used by the Romans. Hengest's treachery was a pretty new thing: the Visigoths and other foederati Germanic tribes were apparently loyal to Rome (more or less) until after Attila. So in a sense, it was a pretty significant surprise.

There is some evidence that Vortigern's eldest son, Vortimer, did not agree with Vortigern's analysis and this formed the rift between them. Vortimer of course fell in battle fighting the traitorous Jutes and Saxons. It is from Vortimer's younger brother, Pascen, however, the same one who fell fighting Uther, that the Powys dynasty was descended.

Edited by jeffjerwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a good case could be made for Vortimer as a tragic hero: hating his father for what happened to his sister, and dying fighting his stepmother's father.

Share this post


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

I think that a case could be made for Vortigern viewing the Irish, the enemy of the Romano-Britons for centuries, as the more significant threat than loyal Germanic mercenaries, often used by the Romans.

Yes, The Irish, Picts and Scotti were a bigger threat at the time. I think Vortigern mistake wasn't so much is setting up Hengest and the other "Saxons" as foederati, but in sticking his head in the sand and letting Hengest have his way once he married Rowena. Ironically the man who wanted so much to rule appears to have been ruled by his wife. 

Had Votigern not been so preoccupied with Rowena he either would have stopped Hengest long before he because a serious threat, or, more likely, Hengest probably wouldn't have acted up in the first place. One strong them in the HRB and other sources is that the Brits are only vulnerable whe they lack a strong leader. When they are without a leader they get persuaded,  raided, and invaded by everybody, but once they have a leader they are practically unbeatable, and even when they lose give better than they get. 

Edited by Atgxtg

Share this post


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

I think a good case could be made for Vortimer as a tragic hero: hating his father for what happened to his sister, and dying fighting his stepmother's father.

I quite agree. Vortimer actually succeeded in driving off the Saxons off Britain during his four battles.  After the last one, Rowena visited Vortimer.  What happens next I purposely left vague depending where you come from, but the end result was the Saxons came back to a peace conference which became known as the Night of Long Knives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is an interesting What-If... What if Vortimer hadn't rebelled? What if the tribes would have simply muttered and bided their time? And once Vortigern dies of old age, then who better to follow him than Vortimer? Thus a unified Cymric coalition kicking the Saxons out, or at least limiting their influence.

Vortimer's first rebellion failed because there was still a large proportion of Loyalists/Neutrals behind Vortigern, while his rebellion mostly included the Saxon Shore tribes, in particular the Cantii. We can see that he had much better luck with his second rebellion, but there was still a large group of Loyalists, even after the Night of the Long Knives.

Anyway, my point is, without that large Loyalist Block behind Vortigern and Vortimer's death robbing the unifying figurehead from the Rebel side, there would not have been need for the 'peace conference' at Stonehenge. Hence no Night of the Long Knives, and no triumphant return of the Sons of Constantin.

Or it could have gone another way, with Hengest and Rowena throwing their support behind Paschent instead, and pitting brother against brother... leading to a peace conference... "Nemet oure saxas!"

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Here is an interesting What-If... What if Vortimer hadn't rebelled? What if the tribes would have simply muttered and bided their time? And once Vortigern dies of old age, then who better to follow him than Vortimer? Thus a unified Cymric coalition kicking the Saxons out, or at least limiting their influence.

I suspect Vortimer - who is always depicted as a good man in Welsh sources - was horrified at his father's treatment of his sister and murder of Constans. One could take a tack from Hamlet to see why even if his rebellion was doomed he was impelled to do it. He may have even been coaxed into it by St. Germanus. Vortigern, the 'Over-Tyrant' as he named himself, is not a charismatic or good man, and his evil deeds lead to civil war. It's simply in his nature to be proud and cruel.

Note also that Saxo's Amlethus, the eventual original of Hamlet, is depicted as a Jutish mercenary who takes part in a slaughter of British.nobles... In Welsh legend, Amlawdd, that is, Amleth, is the father of .... Eigyr or Igraine. Curious that.

So even if Hengest fails, there may be a way for history to 'right itself'. And I'd go with the fatalistic theme in Pendragon, which goes all the way back to the HRB. It isn't just weak leaders that lead to the ruin of the Britons, but their pride and crimes of parricide and fratricide (as Gildas says). Maybe Hengest saw Vortigern's flaws and initially wanted to be his (nobler) successor, before that ambition was thwarted by nascent national resistance. 

Share this post


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

Here is an interesting What-If... What if Vortimer hadn't rebelled?

Somebody else would have. I think the thing is the Brits felt that Vortigern had turned his back on them in favor of the Saxons. I think a revolt of some type was inevitable. If nothing else then it would have been Arulius leading the Brits sometime in the 460s. 

But without the rebellion there might have been more Saxons to resist, or maybe Hengest could have gotten more land out of Vortigern.

 

Here's another interesting what if. What if Vortigmer won? He came close. Would he dispose his father, or maybe keep him on as a figure head.?And what would happen with Aruleius and Uther then? Would Vortimer consider restoring the line of Costanain? Or would his success in driving out the Saxons secure the High Kingship for him and his line? Maybe Aurlius and Uther go to war with Vortimer? 

Share this post


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

Somebody else would have. I think the thing is the Brits felt that Vortigern had turned his back on them in favor of the Saxons. I think a revolt of some type was inevitable. If nothing else then it would have been Arulius leading the Brits sometime in the 460s. 

But without the rebellion there might have been more Saxons to resist, or maybe Hengest could have gotten more land out of Vortigern.

 

Here's another interesting what if. What if Vortigmer won? He came close. Would he dispose his father, or maybe keep him on as a figure head.?And what would happen with Aruleius and Uther then? Would Vortimer consider restoring the line of Costanain? Or would his success in driving out the Saxons secure the High Kingship for him and his line? Maybe Aurlius and Uther go to war with Vortimer? 

In terms of Welsh tradition, Vortimer had a single daughter, Madron, who married Ynyr of Gwent, who appears to have been loyal to Uther or Arthur. Would Aurelius or Uther have married Madron instead? It would have been logical: after all, combined Aurelius and Uther with Vortimer would have defeated Vortigern. But one wonders if they could have solved the succession after Vortigern's demise without a marriage or adoption. Vortimer was the grandson of Magnus Maximus, so he had a fair claim to the throne, as much as either of Constantine's boys. The descendants of Pacsen (Paschent) and Cadell, the other Vortigernids of Powys, were not wiped out and were granted parts of Britain by Aurelius, according to Nennius. Aurelius (but maybe not Uther) seems to have willing to find a compromise and conciliate former enemies. So... if Vortimer had won, Aurelius might have come back to Britain (or even allied with him) and sought a co-kingship, and possibly his daughter's hand. Uther might have chosen civil war...

 

(Note: Severa, daughter of Magnus Maximus, was the first wife of Vortigern, before his marriage to Rowena/Rhonwen).

Edited by jeffjerwin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I could see it going several ways. My "gut" feeling, based on "this must lead to King Arthur" is that Aurelius eventually becomes High King, Vortimer might resist him, but once defeated can become an honorable ally in Cambria and the Normal Pendragon timeline kicks in. Paschent and the other sons of Votigern probably end up being thorns in Arthur's side down the line, much like how some of Lot's sons became a problem. Maybe they become allies of Morden in the latter Periods. 

But that probably more the GM in me looking for an easy solution that preserves the standard KAP course of events.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In SIRES, Vortimer had pretty much won in 462, before he died. He was declared King of Logres by his supporters, and probably could have made that stick. If Aurelius would have chosen that time to throw his weight behind Vortimer, too, they definitely could have taken Vortigern out. The bigger problem was if they'd start fighting each other instead.

One thing to keep in mind... Vortimer had been the hero of the British resistance through 450s. Aurelius was raised in Brittany and didn't even set foot on British soil until 466. This was probably why Aurelius bided his time in the Continent, knowing that all that anti-Vortigern sentiment was behind Vortimer, not Aurelius. But Aurelius did have the support of Brittany, not an insignificant power base to tilt the odds.

So riffing from Jeff's suggestion, a marriage of Aurelius and Madron (I forget if this was the spelling we used in SIRES), with Aurelius either a co-king, or more believably, Vortimer's successor, would work nicely. Vortimer can die later, either in battle against Saxons or of natural causes, and you have Aurelius rising to High Kingship no problem. The marriage of Aurelius and Madron can be childless, and thus the Kingship of Logres goes to Uther, while the Vortigernids have an additional reason to oppose Uther's rise to High Kingship. Under this scheme, there probably isn't the Night of the Long Knives (since Vortimer is strong enough not to need a peace conference), although if that would happen anyway, Vortimer would probably die there and things get reset to the original timeline with Aurelius invading in 466.

Although if you really want to screw with players' expectations, you could have Aurelius joining Vortimer at Stonehenge and both of them getting slain there. :P Leaving Uther as the standard bearer for the line of Constantin, making for a very bloody, and interesting, threeway war between Vortigern (and Paschent) vs. the Saxons vs. Uther. :P

 

 

Share this post


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

In SIRES, Vortimer had pretty much won in 462, before he died. He was declared King of Logres by his supporters, and probably could have made that stick. If Aurelius would have chosen that time to throw his weight behind Vortimer, too, they definitely could have taken Vortigern out. The bigger problem was if they'd start fighting each other instead.

Yeah, Vortimer would has been the hero of the day, and had the good will of the people, whereas Aurelius hadn't done anything for the Brits (not his fault). I think how it played out would depend on if Vortimer wanted to be the leader or if he wanted to restore the "rightful" heir to the throne. I think that dpends on if he rebelled becuase of recent Saxon actions, or if he rebelled because of father's earlier treachery. But there are so many ways a GM could run with it. 

 

48 minutes ago, Morien said:

Although if you really want to screw with players' expectations, you could have Aurelius joining Vortimer at Stonehenge and both of them getting slain there. :P Leaving Uther as the standard bearer for the line of Constantin, making for a very bloody, and interesting, threeway war between Vortigern (and Paschent) vs. the Saxons vs. Uther. :P

Or kill them all off, go right into the anarchy phase, and find out that Uther had an affair with Ygraine and go from there. Very little of the timeline is actually needed to pull off a successful KAP campaign-especially the stuff that happens before the "Sword in the Stone" incident. 

I think my best idea for messing with the players expectations was the idea that one of the PKs was actually Arthur, raised in secret,  and that he would draw the sword from the stone. I never ran with the idea, but just mentioning it keeps that d20 roll that every PK makes during the anarchy phase exciting, because there is that slight possibility that I might go off on the tangental path. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour 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.  

Yeah. I think those options are nice for GMs who are running Pendragon the second, third, forth ,etc. time around. Since the basic over arching story and timeline are essentially the same every time, these potential diverges help to keep things for being the same. Kinda like a Pendragon Mandela Effect.  

Share this post


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...