APP

[Atgxtg]

16 minutes ago, sirlarkins said:

By no means! I'll always support these sort of thought experiments, and you never know: they may even lead to actual products down the line. My inbox is always open for pitches, after all.

Incentive for me to get my armor and horse rules into shape. 

[Atgxtg]

23 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

I think we're on exactly the same page. It would be nice to write this up in a section for the "Book of Courts and Tourneys" 

Please do. I've got a lot on my plate right now. I think I'll swipe Greg's stuff for APP that Ringan kindly reposted, and maybe add in glory for APP 16, as  one of my PKS has a faerie wife, and the children should be very pretty (3d6+11 for the daughters).

 

[Khanwulf]

3 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Please do. I've got a lot on my plate right now. I think I'll swipe Greg's stuff for APP that Ringan kindly reposted, and maybe add in glory for APP 16, as  one of my PKS has a faerie wife, and the children should be very pretty (3d6+11 for the daughters).

 

I will strive to do so. Obviously the area is of interest to me and I'm hoping to have more time for developing these kinds of things in the near future.

You do have a full plate. 

[Atgxtg]

1 minute ago, Khanwulf said:

I will strive to do so. Obviously the area is of interest to me and I'm hoping to have more time for developing these kinds of things in the near future.

You do have a full plate. 

You should know, you've seen some of the rough drafts. 

[Morien]

7 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

One idea would be to have a lady roll and APP roll to try install amor in a viewer. The "Guenevere effect" would kick in on a critical APP roll.

Just to add a note of caution here... If I have been following the discussion correctly, this roll would be done with all the APP bonuses, too, from hairdressers, fashionistas, clothing and jewelry, right? That means it would be very easy (compared to getting a skill that high) to get APP well over 20, even to or over 30. This means that the Player Lady would have a very likely chance to be able to hammer most of the NPKs she meets with the "Guinever effect". Having a bunch of Barons and RTKs with Amor towards you is a very powerful thing, and one that I would hesitate to hand over for a player to use indiscriminately. Sure, you can place some limits on the victims, such as many of the RTKs might have Amors of their own that they would try to stay loyal to, but still.

The above being said, I would very much support the ladies' ability to play the Courtly Amour game after Guinever introduces it. I would be quite happy to give a beautiful player lady the ability to marshal some knights smitten by her, and I would even give her some Glory for their actions, although I think Greg's suggested 50%* might be a bit too much, IF it covers all knights smitten by her. If it is just ONE knight, then it would be OK. I'd even let the player play the smitten knight on the quest, so that the player can participate in the fights (or the quest in general, if the Lady stays home), if the player wants to. Or I might just grant some Glory based on Romance rolls and APP, to cover stuff happening 'off-screen'.

* From here: http://www.gspendragon.com/ladyglory.html , which really should be in the main book, too.

[Atgxtg]

52 minutes ago, Morien said:

Just to add a note of caution here... If I have been following the discussion correctly, this roll would be done with all the APP bonuses, too

Close. We were thinking that to get the "Whammy" that Gwen or Ygraine get the lady would need to roll a critical APP roll. The idea is that Gwen with 29APP and +10 for mods would have a 39 and thus automatically get the effect, as in KAP.

52 minutes ago, Morien said:

The above being said, I would very much support the ladies' ability to play the Courtly Amour game after Guinever introduces it. I would be quite happy to give a beautiful player lady the ability to marshal some knights smitten by her, and I would even give her some Glory for their actions, although I think Greg's suggested 50%* might be a bit too much, IF it covers all knights smitten by her. If it is just ONE knight, then it would be OK. I'd even let the player play the smitten knight on the quest, so that the player can participate in the fights (or the quest in general, if the Lady stays home), if the player wants to.

I think that maybe only one knight should be able to carry her favor at one time. Other knights might do deed in her name, but that probably wouldn't be the same. Maybe 10% Glory?

Also, another way to keep this in check migth be if the Glory comes from the knight, as if he had to share the glory with the lady- because without her to inspire him he wouldn't have done as well, right?). 

52 minutes ago, Morien said:

Or I might just grant some Glory based on Romance rolls and APP, to cover stuff happening 'off-screen'.

I could see either. I think it really depends on if you have people playing ladier characters and giving them something to do. Like battles, tournaments and feasts it depends on how much the GM wants to fouc on a given event.

52 minutes ago, Morien said:

* From here: http://www.gspendragon.com/ladyglory.html , which really should be in the main book, too.

Ooh, nice stuff. I guess the extra 1000 a woman gets for her wedding is the ladies equivalent of being knighted. And being able to choose gender for the child would be a real plus

[Khanwulf]

11 hours ago, Morien said:

Just to add a note of caution here... If I have been following the discussion correctly, this roll would be done with all the APP bonuses, too, from hairdressers, fashionistas, clothing and jewelry, right? That means it would be very easy (compared to getting a skill that high) to get APP well over 20, even to or over 30. This means that the Player Lady would have a very likely chance to be able to hammer most of the NPKs she meets with the "Guinever effect". Having a bunch of Barons and RTKs with Amor towards you is a very powerful thing, and one that I would hesitate to hand over for a player to use indiscriminately. Sure, you can place some limits on the victims, such as many of the RTKs might have Amors of their own that they would try to stay loyal to, but still.

The above being said, I would very much support the ladies' ability to play the Courtly Amour game after Guinever introduces it. I would be quite happy to give a beautiful player lady the ability to marshal some knights smitten by her, and I would even give her some Glory for their actions, although I think Greg's suggested 50%* might be a bit too much, IF it covers all knights smitten by her. If it is just ONE knight, then it would be OK. I'd even let the player play the smitten knight on the quest, so that the player can participate in the fights (or the quest in general, if the Lady stays home), if the player wants to. Or I might just grant some Glory based on Romance rolls and APP, to cover stuff happening 'off-screen'.

* From here: http://www.gspendragon.com/ladyglory.html , which really should be in the main book, too.

The assumption from the exchanges is that you don't get the effect attributed to Guen and Ygraine in the books unless you can a) crank APP to 40+, at which point you've broken the dice system and thereby gain the special bonus. Or, b) you apply your APP to one poor sot in conjunction with skills, and say: succeed in the skill roll and crit your APP roll. At that point your smitten subject needs to roll per the GPC/BoU. There may still need to be adjustments, but what needs to happen (IMO) is either ditching the mechanic or ensuring there is a way for PLs to exercise it.

Let's talk about Greg's listing of glory awards, since you've (quite properly) brought it up:

First, do you think the awards are appropriate? Should they be adjusted if there are, say, other defined glory income opportunities? At the moment this is a definitive list of all the ways a Lady could expect to gain glory, excepting displays of skill in court. (And defeating enemies of course.)

"First Marriage: 1000 after the wedding (husband does not get equal points). PLUS Glory equal to her husband’s." --This is... a lot of glory! But is it subject to the cap of 1000 for a single incident? In that case the man's glory award portion would top out at 1000, and the woman would get 1000 for the wedding plus 1000 for the man = 2000. And any knight would do.... I guess size really doesn't matter when you just want to land a fish, eh?

Or, did Greg intend to divide husband's glory by some amount (10?) and ignore the cap? That would make pursuing glorious knights very worthwhile since it would represent the quickest and fasted way to glory and thus social station. Pretty much as it was, in fact. An alternative would be to keep the cap of 1000 and adjust the bonus to the point desired; if /10 then the max glory of the husband that matters becomes 10,000.

However /10 is the bonus from in-law glory when children wed, so Greg probably did intend the flat amount from the husband. Which is odd since that will automatically tend make the wife more glorious than her husband unless his glory is < 1000. (Husband award for marriage may affect the balance.)

On the other hand, landing that 20k knight makes the prospect of trading in your "huge tracts... of land" for nuptials much more appealing.

 

--Khanwulf

 

 

Edited April 9, 2019 by Khanwulf

[Atgxtg]

29 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

 

"First Marriage: 1000 after the wedding (husband does not get equal points). PLUS Glory equal to her husband’s." --This is... a lot of glory!

I though the same at first. Then I realized that was Greg was doing was making the wedding ceremony the woman's equivalent of a knighting ceremony. So that's the 1000 points she gets.

 

29 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

But is it subject to the cap of 1000 for a single incident? 

Obviously not. If it were subject to the cap then the husband's glory wouldn't matter. I think this was written before the 1000 point cap, which BTW I don't agree with. If Sir Lancelot slaw a dozen dragons in a single battle don't you think he would get more glory for it than if he slew one or two?

TO bring this in-line with the 1000 point cap. Assume that the 100 Glory is for the wedding and the Husband's glory is from the consummation. It's a bit sketchy, but ladies have a hard enough time earning glory and this will be the only time they do so. Either that or make this a one time exception.

But...you'd thing there would be something to be married to a knight who keeps doing glorious deeds. Maybe wives should get a fraction of the glory their husbands earn during the year? Maybe 10%. And possibly vice versa (could be simulated for NPL wives with 1d6 roll each year for courtly stuff).

 

 

[Morien]

1 hour ago, Khanwulf said:

Or, b) you apply your APP to one poor sot in conjunction with skills, and say: succeed in the skill roll and crit your APP roll. At that point your smitten subject needs to roll per the GPC/BoU.

This is what I am warning you against. This means that someone with a rather modest investment (for a Lady) in APP and followers and jewelry can go around Camelot and pick up smitten RTKs and Barons. After all, if all it takes is a smile (even if it requires a skill success, whatever skill it might be), why wouldn't you collect as many smitten knights as you could? I mean, Guinever does it even without trying, so why shouldn't you? Sure, not every knight would get affected to the same extent, but the odds are good that enough of them would be. Having a baron or two with Amor towards you would give you hell of a lot of power.

Of course, as a GM in whose campaign a Player Lady became Agravaine's lover, it is not so much that I object the Player Ladies using their brains and beauty to get ahead and influence their menfolk. It is the fact that this power under discussion would allow them to enthrall dozens of famous knights & barons just by rolling some dice, rather than just one. After all, Guinever's beauty doesn't have any limit on the number of knights that may fall in love with her. Eventually, the Player Lady would roll a critical and wham, potential eager suitor/patsy. Next, please!

I should also mention that I don't use this power of Guinever nor Lancelot in my campaigns. Instead, the PKs can choose to get affected, if they want to generate an Amor for the High Queen. They don't have to roll to resist. There is no supernatural aura.

36 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Obviously not. If it were subject to the cap then the husband's glory wouldn't matter. I think this was written before the 1000 point cap, which BTW I don't agree with. If Sir Lancelot slaw a dozen dragons in a single battle don't you think he would get more glory for it than if he slew one or two? 

Yeah, there are some issues with that cap, and furthermore, it is pretty much unnecessary as long as you get rid of all the Battle Glory multipliers, in particular when it comes to extended melee in BoB2. You also get Glory for the Leap after the Knighting Ceremony which stacks up. I would have no problem with each individual dragon being a single instance with that 1000 cap, in your Lancelot example.

The Marriage Glory rule (equal glory, capped at 1000) has pissed me off since I started playing KAP, since like Khanwulf pointed out, it means any knight would do. Also, it means that widows are suddenly as much worth in Glory as Guinever herself, which feels very wrong to me. So I came up with my own 'marriage glory formula'. But this is a different discussion altogether, I feel.

36 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

But...you'd thing there would be something to be married to a knight who keeps doing glorious deeds. Maybe wives should get a fraction of the glory their husbands earn during the year? Maybe 10%. And possibly vice versa (could be simulated for NPL wives with 1d6 roll each year for courtly stuff). 

Oh, I do like this idea. Surely the wife should get some reflected Glory. I also like your earlier idea that the Amor-Inspired Knight should choose how much Glory he dedicates to his Lady, thus diminishing the Glory he gains from it. Although I guess I would be fine with a similar rule as above for the True Lover. We hear a lot about the knights Lancelot sends back to Guinever, but I'd assume that Guinever would not be getting tons of Glory for all the hundreds of young knights doing things 'in her name'.

All the more reason, IMHO, to limit the Amor Passion only for a reciprocal relationship, and have the one-sided ones be something else, like Covet for the lustful sorts and Pine for the more chaste but unrequited ones.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Morien

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, Morien said:

This is what I am warning you against. This means that someone with a rather modest investment (for a Lady) in APP and followers and jewelry can go around Camelot and pick up smitten RTKs and Barons. After all, if all it takes is a smile (even if it requires a skill success, whatever skill it might be), why wouldn't you collect as many smitten knights as you could? I mean, Guinever does it even without trying, so why shouldn't you? Sure, not every knight would get affected to the same extent, but the odds are good that enough of them would be. Having a baron or two with Amor towards you would give you hell of a lot of power.

It's a concern. Maybe we should just roll back to my original idea of unmodified APP over 25? 

1 hour ago, Morien said:

Of course, as a GM in whose campaign a Player Lady became Agravaine's lover, it is not so much that I object the Player Ladies using their brains and beauty to get ahead and influence their menfolk. It is the fact that this power under discussion would allow them to enthrall dozens of famous knights & barons just by rolling some dice, rather than just one. After all, Guinever's beauty doesn't have any limit on the number of knights that may fall in love with her. Eventually, the Player Lady would roll a critical and wham, potential eager suitor/patsy. Next, please!

Yeah, that could be a problem. A pity too as it was a nice way to make APP valuable.

1 hour ago, Morien said:

Yeah, there are some issues with that cap, and furthermore, it is pretty much unnecessary as long as you get rid of all the Battle Glory multipliers, in particular when it comes to extended melee in BoB2. You also get Glory for the Leap after the Knighting Ceremony which stacks up. I would have no problem with each individual dragon being a single instance with that 1000 cap, in your Lancelot example.

Yeah, I think it would have made more sense just to adjust the BoB rather than everything else. All that ends up happening in BoB2 is that in a big battle players eventually have no reason to track glory anymore since they hit the wall. SO functionally the modifiers don't really matter unless the battle is small or the PKs do poorly, inc which case the multiplier help to give similar glory to a big battle. Sort of counterproductive. 

1 hour ago, Morien said:

The Marriage Glory rule (equal glory, capped at 1000) has pissed me off since I started playing KAP, since like Khanwulf pointed out, it means any knight would do. Also, it means that widows are suddenly as much worth in Glory as Guinever herself, which feels very wrong to me. So I came up with my own 'marriage glory formula'. But this is a different discussion altogether, I feel.

I kinda wish we could step back to KAP1 in some ways, and use a 1/10th or 1/5th rule. That way marring a king with 20000 Glory would mean something. I know the old 1/10th friom oppnents was a bit much, but a 1% rule would match up fairly close to what we got now. Yeah a PK could get 1000 Glory for detating Arthur or Lancelot that way, but Lacelot doesn't lose and Arthur rarely does, nor do any knights with 32K+ glory. . 

 

1 hour ago, Morien said:

Oh, I do like this idea. Surely the wife should get some reflected Glory. I also like your earlier idea that the Amor-Inspired Knight should choose how much Glory he dedicates to his Lady, thus diminishing the Glory he gains from it. Although I guess I would be fine with a similar rule as above for the True Lover. We hear a lot about the knights Lancelot sends back to Guinever, but I'd assume that Guinever would not be getting tons of Glory for all the hundreds of young knights doing things 'in her name'

You know I didn't think of it as the knight choosing how much of the glory to give, but I'm glad you viewed it that way because, I like it too. So a knight goes off to impress his lady and earns 1000 Glory in her name, gives her all the glory and she gets a glory point. 

And by extension every 1000 glory that a knight gives his amor could reduce her resistance by 1 point. 

Maybe the knight should have to keep some of the glory though, since he did it. I mean if a guy slaws a dragon, even to impress a lady, he still did it. So 50-50 split tops?

1 hour ago, Morien said:

.All the more reason, IMHO, to limit the Amor Passion only for a reciprocal relationship, and have the one-sided ones be something else, like Covet for the lustful sorts and Pine for the more chaste but unrequited ones.

Nah, I don't mind one sided amor passions. But since this could be a competition between suitor, perhaps only the greater source of glory given to her count each year? The five bandits that Sir Lovestruck captured in her name probably pale in comparison to the Giant that Sir Truelove slew.   

[Morien]

3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Maybe the knight should have to keep some of the glory though, since he did it. I mean if a guy slaws a dragon, even to impress a lady, he still did it. So 50-50 split tops?

Yeah, that seems fair.

3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Nah, I don't mind one sided amor passions. But since this could be a competition between suitor, perhaps only the greater source of glory given to her count each year? The five bandits that Sir Lovestruck captured in her name probably pale in comparison to the Giant that Sir Truelove slew.   

Yep, I could get behind that idea. This way, it doesn't ratchet out of control by getting several Amors. Also, I think you can't get more than one Lover's Solo Glory, too, so there is precedent.

3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

And by extension every 1000 glory that a knight gives his amor could reduce her resistance by 1 point.  

I feel it should be more. Successful tasks in the Lover's Solo reduce RF by 1. Surely 1000 Glory is way more than that. I'd be tempted to put it as low as 1 per 100 Glory, which, let's face it, is already about half of taking down a Giant single-handed. That is pretty impressive in my book.

Then again, I think the whole RF & Task system needs an overhaul, too, but that is again a separate discussion...

3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

It's a concern. Maybe we should just roll back to my original idea of unmodified APP over 25? 

As said, I dislike this 'magic aura effect', so I wouldn't have it at all. If I did, I would push it to APP 30, since it is clear that it happens only in very, very special cases. (As an aside, maybe Guinever's dropping APP is why suddenly knights started whispering about her and Lancelot, while previously everyone was smitten by her 'aura'...)

3 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Yeah, that could be a problem. A pity too as it was a nice way to make APP valuable.

Only at really high values and only for the women, though. I think Greg's latest thinking on introducing social skill bonuses is the way to go, although I disagree with the way the bonus is calculated. Like you pointed out yourself, it leaves the vast majority of APP scores without any bonus, unless you get it to 16+.

This by itself is not enough. We would need some more rules on making the social skills actually matter more. Book of Feasts is a good first step towards that, but there needs to be opportunities for the Courtier characters not only to gain significant Glory (a few points of Glory is not significant, and APP crit is as common for APP 5 as it is for APP 19...), but actually manage to influence things. As a quick example, using Courtesy to polish the Count's fundament and Intrigue to dig up dirt on the rivals to trip them up, so that you end up with the Heiress*/Officership after some years of patient work (while also doing heroics, obviously).

One easy-ish way would be to bring back the yearly Courtesy roll while hunting for a random wife, but give -1 on a Fail (not enough smooch on the comital patoot; thy ardor has cooled, Sir Knight), which would ensure that you really want high-ish Courtesy to play this game. Allow this modifier to add to the Deeds modifier in ENTOURAGE, up to a max of +10. In short, the Count's Favorites would get a very nice leg-up on the marriage market, either for themselves or for their eldest sons (this is not considered nearly often enough!). Similar rolls could be used when applying for Officership. Once the bonus has been used, it goes away, and you need to start building it up again. Wives could help in this, too, and suddenly, a courtier wife becomes a much more desirable concept rather than always choosing the stay-at-home Stewardship Wife.

And finally, for the women, rules on how you actually use the Fine Amour to get the knights to do your bidding, and Glory gain therein, too. Something that is being discussed in this thread.

[Khanwulf]

24 minutes ago, Morien said:

I feel it should be more. Successful tasks in the Lover's Solo reduce RF by 1. Surely 1000 Glory is way more than that. I'd be tempted to put it as low as 1 per 100 Glory, which, let's face it, is already about half of taking down a Giant single-handed. That is pretty impressive in my book.

Then again, I think the whole RF & Task system needs an overhaul, too, but that is again a separate discussion...

As said, I dislike this 'magic aura effect', so I wouldn't have it at all. If I did, I would push it to APP 30, since it is clear that it happens only in very, very special cases. (As an aside, maybe Guinever's dropping APP is why suddenly knights started whispering about her and Lancelot, while previously everyone was smitten by her 'aura'...)

Only at really high values and only for the women, though. I think Greg's latest thinking on introducing social skill bonuses is the way to go, although I disagree with the way the bonus is calculated. Like you pointed out yourself, it leaves the vast majority of APP scores without any bonus, unless you get it to 16+.

This by itself is not enough. We would need some more rules on making the social skills actually matter more. Book of Feasts is a good first step towards that, but there needs to be opportunities for the Courtier characters not only to gain significant Glory (a few points of Glory is not significant, and APP crit is as common for APP 5 as it is for APP 19...), but actually manage to influence things. As a quick example, using Courtesy to polish the Count's fundament and Intrigue to dig up dirt on the rivals to trip them up, so that you end up with the Heiress*/Officership after some years of patient work (while also doing heroics, obviously).

Very good points Morien, thank you for the follow-up. First: agreed on the mystical beauty aura--I'm inclined to ditch it entirely as unnecessary railroading. Interactions with the characters can and should drive passion creation, along with mechanics (as are being discussed here) around the flow and division of glory between knights and ladies in amor. 

Put that way, perhaps the real revolution of the Court of Love was in asking the men to "share". Before then the ladies got glory from hitting milestones, but not the relationship, per se. Guen (with Arthur's tacit support) codified how the courts would promulgate glory for upholding women through knightly deeds. Of course, as you and Atgxtg point out, doing so should be limited to whomever "wins" the contest for a given year (a cycle of courts).

Lady1: "Have you heard of Sir BigLance? He slew 50 Saxons in her name!"

Maidens: "Ooo!"

Lady2: "What about Sir SlightlySmallerLance? Have we heard anything since the two giants in spring?"

Maidens: "No and who cares!"

Sir SSLance: "Hey now! It's not the size, it's how you use it!"

...

I'm also in favor of overhauling the RF & Task system. And yes that needs to be another discussion, but they are inter-related. My off-hand opinion is that it is at once too easy to seduce a lady through the system and takes too long. The problem is focus: the system is there to model sanctioned seduction AND to model chaste relationships for the sake of generating glory. I think there needs to be a distinction in active objective--at least until someone changes their mind!

Back to the amor "aura", however: perhaps the real benefit to it is not in lining up smitten admirers, but in dividing the courts on the ladies between those who react with jealousy (suspicion) versus admiration. The latter effectively creates armor versus intrigue based solely on passive appearance. So perhaps can hone in that and let the knights decide separately if they want to salute the lady's flag for the sake of glory? Instead of a check upon meeting, just note mentally if a given character has met the lady, and then when intrigue is used against her (or, him) penalize it by some amount based on APP >30? Similarly, intrigue bonus for using it against someone with very low APP? (Less than 10, since you're disabled if it drops below 5.)

On the point of making social skills matter... maybe the influence game amounts to collecting modifiers to the final roll? Or, in collecting "damage" against a target result's "health"? It's more tracking, but you're doing court, so what do you expect? 

Just brainstorming at this point.

 

--Khanwulf

[Morien]

Just as a quick aside...

In the old Nocturnal Forums, someone (alas, I forget who) posted a suggestion of using APP as a Glory modifier: x (APP/10). So someone with APP 15 would get +50% Glory for everything.

At the time, I thought this was a bit excessive and a hassle for the book-keeping, but if you are doing pen and paper, you probably are doing the Glory Totals at the end of the year anyway, so it is just one multiplication. And in excel sheets you can code it in, if you really want to.

Is it excessive, though? Not necessarily. 5 points in APP is almost +1d6 in Damage, which is a pretty significant combat edge, or Sword 20 instead of 15 (ditto). Sir Prettyboy gets an easypass thanks to his good looks, since all the ladies and even other knights like to gossip about him, whereas Sir Hitonface struggles to get his glorious deeds widely talked about, hence lower Glory.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Morien

[Morien]

23 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

maybe the influence game amounts to collecting modifiers to the final roll?

Yes, that is what I was suggesting although the 'final roll' in this case is not a skill roll, but a roll to achieve a goal, to get something from the liege, whether it is a position or a suitable wife. In short, there would need to be a 'Favors from the liege' table, where you could try to cash in your modifiers or make a roll, spending gathered modifiers, to achieve whatever goal you are aiming for. Although it should be set up so that if you are aiming for, say a currently vacant position of a marshal and fail to get it, it doesn't mean that you lost the modifiers. The Liege still likes you, but had another guy in mind for the position (actually, this roll should be an opposed roll, with Intrigue used to hurt the other's chances over the years, the rival thing I mentioned). However, in the marriage table, you take your chances and marry who the Liege has in mind, since in his mind, he has made the perfect choice for you, and to say no means that you insult his judgement.

As for the rest of your post, I have little to add, save for:

31 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

Back to the amor "aura",

Let's not.

I don't think it is needed, if they are getting big bonuses to skills anyway, and secondly, making up special rules for such clear outliers is not really useful for making APP useful in 10 - 20 range.

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, Morien said:

 

Only at really high values and only for the women, though. I think Greg's latest thinking on introducing social skill bonuses is the way to go, although I disagree with the way the bonus is calculated. Like you pointed out yourself, it leaves the vast majority of APP scores without any bonus, unless you get it to 16+.

. I considered something something similar to RQ with:1-4=-2 5-8=-1: 9-12= +0, 13-16=+1 17-21=+2 but it seems a bit weak. 

19 minutes ago, Morien said:

Just as a quick aside...

In the old Nocturnal Forums, someone (alas, I forget who) posted a suggestion of using APP as a Glory modifier: x (APP/10). So someone with APP 15 would get +50% Glory for everything.

At the time, I thought this was a bit excessive and a hassle for the book-keeping, but if you are doing pen and paper, you probably are doing the Glory Totals at the end of the year anyway, so it is just one multiplication. And in excel sheets you can code it in, if you really want to.

 

19 minutes ago, Morien said:

Is it excessive, though? Not necessarily. 5 points in APP is almost +1d6 in Damage, which is a pretty significant combat edge, or Sword 20 instead of 15 (ditto). Sir Prettyboy gets an easypass thanks to his good looks, since all the ladies and even other knights like to gossip about him, whereas Sir Hitonface struggles to get his glorious deeds widely talked about, hence lower Glory.

I think it is. While an extra d6 damage is nice 50% more glory is phenomenal. Especially on the big awards,or for those who get a religious bonus or some such. I think it would lead to massive glory inflation and higher stats. So the 15 APP guy will end up with the extra d6 too.

It the math were easier I'd suggest 15% (i.e. !% per point over 10) but that would be a pain. 

[Atgxtg]

8 minutes ago, Morien said:

Let's not.

I don't think it is needed, if they are getting big bonuses to skills anyway, and secondly, making up special rules for such clear outliers is not really useful for making APP useful in 10 - 20 range.

Yeah it does look like overkill with PLs trying to vamp at least one new victim per year. 

 

We just need to find another way to make APP and women more significant in KAP.

 

 

[Morien]

38 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

. I considered something something similar to RQ with:1-4=-2 5-8=-1: 9-12= +0, 13-16=+1 17-21=+2 but it seems a bit weak. 

My pref: (APP-11)/2, normal rounding rules. So (10-11)/2 = -1/2 = 0. 12-13 = +1, 14-15 = +2, 16-17 = +3, 18-19=+4, 20-21=+5... And maybe cap it at +10 (APP 30).

38 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

I think it is. While an extra d6 damage is nice 50% more glory is phenomenal. Especially on the big awards,or for those who get a religious bonus or some such. I think it would lead to massive glory inflation and higher stats. So the 15 APP guy will end up with the extra d6 too. 

It the math were easier I'd suggest 15% (i.e. !% per point over 10) but that would be a pain.  

Well, you would need 10 000 Base Glory to gain extra 5 Glory Bonus Points (5000 Glory) to make up for it. In short, by the probable end of the PK's career, you have just broken even. I don't see that excessive, given that you have been working with a handicap (-1d6) to reach that 10k, in comparison to your combat-optimized fellow. Meaning that you are more likely to lose fights, with possibly fatal or major wound consequences.

At +1% per extra point of APP, you'd need to reach 20k to see ONE extra Glory Bonus Point at APP 15. This is such an insignificant gain that it would not be worth even calculating. In particular since getting to 20k tends to be a pipedream for most of the PKs, in my experience. YPMV.

[Atgxtg]

32 minutes ago, Morien said:

My pref: (APP-11)/2, normal rounding rules. So (10-11)/2 = -1/2 = 0. 12-13 = +1, 14-15 = +2, 16-17 = +3, 18-19=+4, 20-21=+5... And maybe cap it at +10 (APP 30).

Yeah it's the standard D20 method, and it works well with KAP.  I don't think you need the 30 cap though. APP 32+ is pretty rare. Even a half-fae female maxes out naturally at 29. And that's assuming an 18 roll. 

32 minutes ago, Morien said:

Well, you would need 10 000 Base Glory to gain extra 5 Glory Bonus Points (5000 Glory) to make up for it. In short, by the probable end of the PK's career, you have just broken even.

No, it better than that. Because of the increased Glory the character would get 5000 glory in the time it would have taken him to get 3333 glory. From that point he got his 5 points back to spend on that extra damage die, plus the 50% increase in glory. That in turn makes the character much more likely win more fights and earn even more glory.

Then, when he hits age 35, the increased glory would allow him to mitigate some of the effects fo aging, extending the PKs career.Now if the PK has good traits and one of the bonuses he can hit that 10K glory much faster. 

 

 

 

 

32 minutes ago, Morien said:

I don't see that excessive, given that you have been working with a handicap (-1d6) to reach that 10k, in comparison to your combat-optimized fellow. Meaning that you are more likely to lose fights, with possibly fatal or major wound consequences.

The handicap wouldn't last the whole career though, only until the PK earns enough glory to get that d6. So I think that in a short time (in Pendragon terms) they could overtake the other PKs and come out ahead in the deal.

And if you going to do 15, consider 20. At double glory 10K is reachable before a PK hits the aging table. 

 

32 minutes ago, Morien said:

At +1% per extra point of APP, you'd need to reach 20k to see ONE extra Glory Bonus Point at APP 15. This is such an insignificant gain that it would not be worth even calculating.

If that were the case then we should drop all the 10-25 glory point awards for much the same reason. 

32 minutes ago, Morien said:

In particular since getting to 20k tends to be a pipedream for most of the PKs, in my experience. YPMV.

Yeah, for most. I think I've seen a couple who hit that level, but they had great traits, the chivalry and religious bonuses, some high passions, several manors, and hit their prime right at the end of the Anarchy Period and so go to go through all those battles in the Boy King Period. So it was sort of a perfect storm.

[Khanwulf]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

We just need to find another way to make APP and women more significant in KAP.

 

Agreed and I'm perfectly willing to redline-out the Amor aura in my Pendragon. It's annoying. 

Also, to Morien's point, I'm not convinced that glory inflation matters as much now as it did in earlier versions. Stat inflation from BoK&L and version updates have already resulted in a decrease in the value of the glory increase point, and if you compare stat investment as Morien has the situation is more stark. How many players want to choose between being pretty and dealing an additional 1d6 damage... 2d6 on a crit? Every time? Yeah... and this is why SIZ is its own problem. So APP needs to be brought up to the point where it can be at least held equal to STR or CON in value.

Instead of a favors table, might we be able to reduce influence to a monetary value, then translate that monetary value over to other rolls? If you're angling for a position, what is the value of a bribe? If you want a marriage match, paying the Count affects it how much? Etc. 

So. Basically the lady (or knight) can accumulate cash and valuables, but also "goodwill" both specifically with someone and generally, and leverage that asset to accomplish something needed. At least up to a point. As we know you can only push a negotiation so far....

On the matter of APP bonuses from hairstyling, tailoring and jewelry (not magic stuff), I had a thought. What if the APP bonus degraded similar to how suits of clothes wear out? Only faster: 1/2 bonus value per year used. Or -1 bonus per event if you like. You can make a splash with your new bling, or outfit, but after being talked about people just accept that it's "you" and move on. So you need to re-spend for new jewelry, invest in a new stylist, get new clothes, etc. in order to keep up your "A" game at court.

Because if you're collecting goodwill, others are too!

 

--Khanwulf

 

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, Khanwulf said:

Agreed and I'm perfectly willing to redline-out the Amor aura in my Pendragon. It's annoying. 

Also, to Morien's point, I'm not convinced that glory inflation matters as much now as it did in earlier versions.

I think it does. 

1 hour ago, Khanwulf said:

Stat inflation from BoK&L and version updates have already resulted in a decrease in the value of the glory increase point,

I don't think so because we've also gotten glory inflation. There are more ways to get glory now and higher awards. Marriage, Book of Battle, feasts, a lot more glory. You can see it in the higher glory totals for the various named characters through the editions. 

1 hour ago, Khanwulf said:

and if you compare stat investment as Morien has the situation is more stark. How many players want to choose between being pretty and dealing an additional 1d6 damage... 2d6 on a crit? Every time? Yeah... and this is why SIZ is its own problem.

If being pretty comes with a 50% glory increase quite a few. Skill is much more important than the extra damage die. I think a high skill. +50% glory PC is going to catch up and pass that +1d6 guy.  

1 hour ago, Khanwulf said:

So APP needs to be brought up to the point where it can be at least held equal to STR or CON in value.

Same with DEX. It's never been on par STR and CON, and between the high armor penalties and the removal of the double feint, it's not much better than APP.

1 hour ago, Khanwulf said:

Instead of a favors table, might we be able to reduce influence to a monetary value, then translate that monetary value over to other rolls? If you're angling for a position, what is the value of a bribe? If you want a marriage match, paying the Count affects it how much? Etc. 

Maybe but that runs the risk of rick PKs just buying their way through things, which could reduce the wife's contribution again. For instance in my campaign the poorest PK, a household knight just sold two extra charges gotten in battle, for £20. That would be allow the character to bypass a lot of RPing. 

 

1 hour ago, Khanwulf said:

So. Basically the lady (or knight) can accumulate cash and valuables, but also "goodwill" both specifically with someone and generally, and leverage that asset to accomplish something needed. At least up to a point. As we know you can only push a negotiation so far....

On the matter of APP bonuses from hairstyling, tailoring and jewelry (not magic stuff), I had a thought. What if the APP bonus degraded similar to how suits of clothes wear out?

It does. Fashion bonuses only last for one "event" (basically they need to get their hair and makeup done again). APP bonus from clothing degrade. Jewelry is constant, however.  The thing is if a player gets some spare libra and buys a permanent  +10 modifier.

I kinda like what Morien did for the wife table in Book of Entourage. What if we based it off of that and had a escalating cost? If the cost to improve APP by 1 point with accessories was equal to the character's APP? So it would get increasingly expensive to get another plus. So someone like Guinevere, a £1 silver ring just won't impress people anymore. She  would need to spend £40 to get her effective APP up to 41.  Now she can afford that, but  for most knights, that means they can't buy a destrier. 

 

 

But, I'm just brainstorming and haven't seen what you got in context. 

 

[7dot62mm]

In the old Nocturnal forums there was this use for APP:

In order to attract the attention of a lady you need to win opposed roll of (your APP+(glory/1000)) vs. the lady's APP. If unsuccessful, you fail to make an impression so cannot invite her to dance, or to flirt with her or whatever.

I'm also considering awarding a modifier to all social skills (those also affected by glory) of something like:

APP   Modifier

-----------------------

1      -5

2      -4

3      -3

4       -2

5      -1

16     +1

17     +2

18    +3

The bonus would only apply to raw APP, not your clothes and hairdo... of course as Pendragon has APP going to 32 and beyond then I still need to think about this a bit.

 

 

[Morien]

10 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

The handicap wouldn't last the whole career though, only until the PK earns enough glory to get that d6. So I think that in a short time (in Pendragon terms) they could overtake the other PKs and come out ahead in the deal.

And if you going to do 15, consider 20. At double glory 10K is reachable before a PK hits the aging table. 

That is kinda my point. The handicap lasts through most of the PK's  career. Sure, once you hit 10k Base Glory, the APP 15 guy gets even with damage/skill, and then has that extra bonus to Glory to enjoy, but this assumes 2 things:

1.) That the two knights would have gained Base Glory at the same rate, which is likely not true due to Sir Smasher being a better fighter and hence gaining more Glory from defeating the foes.

2.) That most of the game would happen past the 10k mark, which is untrue in my experience.

As for APP 20 guy, let him! This means that he will spend most of the game with crap other stats, and will struggle to win fights and likely suffers more Major Wounds due to low CON.

The trade-off is that your character will be worse in the beginning but then catch up and surpass his fellows in the late game, IF he survives that long. If you look at them at the beginning of their careers, this is obvious (assumption: Cymric +3 CON, 60 points and 3 raises to stats, Base Glory 1200):

A: SIZ 18, DEX 10, STR 15, CON 10+3, APP 10, DMG 6d6, HP 32, Move 3, Healing 3, Glory 1200

B: SIZ 18, DEX 10, STR 10, CON 10+3, APP 15, DMG 5d6, HP 32, Move 2, Healing 2, Glory 1800

The difference in skills is moot, since we can assume in this simple comparison that they have exact same skills that increase at the exact same rate. The point is to compare STATS, after all, to see if APP measures up. And it is clear that here, B is clearly the inferior of the two in a fight and survivability. Granted, Move and Heal don't come to play nearly as often as they should, but Healing 3 is a huge improvement when it comes to recovering from Chirurgery Needed, compared to 2. This, at least, B can catch up to quickly enough by increasing his STR (or CON) by one ASAP.

Knight B does have a small additional advantage that he gets a bigger Glory skill modifier, but that was kinda baked in to Greg's suggestion as well (higher APP assumed to be the leader, etc other social benefits). He also benefits from the fact that once he hits Skill 20, he can use Yearly Training for his stats (until he is 35) and Glory for his main skill, something that Knight A cannot do. However, A can use the Yearly training somewhere else, and thus gain an advantage in a higher skill or stat (CON!) elsewhere, partially compensating for this. Also, that wouldn't kick in until B reaches Skill 20, which takes some time, too. We also ignore in this approach the likely assumption that A would gain more Glory from duels and other individual fights, where he would win more frequently than B, and likely get less Major Wounds, too, due to knocking the enemies and wounding them more frequently, making for shorter fights.

By 10k base Glory, we can definitely say that B has caught up with those extra 5 Glory bonus points, and is a better character: he has more Glory and will continue getting more Glory, and possibly has a higher main weapon skill, too. However, as I keep saying, 10k base Glory is not even a middle game glory in our campaign. It is more like the end of career Glory, before the stats start plummeting and the characters' luck finally runs out as they are asked to do more and more heroic things. If we take out the Boy King & Conquest with their scripted Glory-heavy Battles, the characters struggle to break 10k, IMHO.This means that for most of the play, the B has a handicap compared to A. You might disagree how big that handicap is, but it is there. Whether the actual break-even point is more like 8k is up for debate, but even this is rarely reached in our campaign within a decade. Again, it is about accepting a handicap at first, in order to become stronger in the endgame.

Edited April 10, 2019 by Morien

[Hzark10]

Morien,

good analysis.

I don't think this is, by nature, bad.  A paragraph or two in the book would go a long way to explain this towards those who don't see it.  And the gm should take the time to explain these differences.  Going back to the idea of 4 generic types of knights (Joe Average, Master of the Hunt, The Fighter, The Courtier), one can see the differences in attributes and skills.  Knowing beforehand that the gm is running a campaign from 480-518, courtly skills are not as important as combat skills. Still, one can take the Courtier, but may indeed suffer from it.  That is a player's choice, as long as he knows beforehand.

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, Morien said:

That is kinda my point. The handicap lasts through most of the PK's  career.

No it doesn't. You assuming that the PK breaks even at 10K . I say he catches up long before that. Once he has enough Glory to buy the extra d6 he is ahead of the game.

1 hour ago, Morien said:

1.) That the two knights would have gained Base Glory at the same rate, which is likely not true due to Sir Smasher being a better fighter and hence gaining more Glory from defeating the foes.

Sir Smasher extra d6 is not going to equate to a 50% glory each session. Damage is not the priamry factor in glory awards. Assuming that both PKs have similar trait and skill values then Smasher isn't going to get much more glory. Especially as a lot of glory is split up among the group anyway. 

 

1 hour ago, Morien said:

2.) That most of the game would happen past the 10k mark, which is untrue in my experience.

No, but high APP would catch upo long before then.

Take two average starting PKs. Now Sir Smasher puts 5 more points into SIZ& STR to get 5d6 damage. Sir Prettyboy take a 15 APP, but skill has enough points to take a 12 in average else, or more likely SIZ 14, STR 10. So by the time he gets 3000 glory he will be able to buy up his SIZ and STR to the 5d6 level. And that's not counting training and practice.

 

Now as I said, Sir Smasher won't be earning glory 50% faster due to an extra die of damage, so he will probably get about 2000 glory, but lets say 2500. That won't take long. By the time the knights are knighted, landed and married they will be in the 1250-2500 range (depends on the wives glory), and Sir Pretty boy would get 50% more so he's closing the gap already.

Now lyes Smasher can spend his glory and training to up his abilities, but it will take awhile to get yet another die, assuming that he can, and putting the points elsewhere might be counteracted by yearly improvement rolls, which have a greater overall impact than glory points. 

So by the time they are 25 I think the situation will be reversed. Smasher might have higher SIZ and STR but not enough to keep his 1 die advantage. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Morien said:

As for APP 20 guy, let him! This means that he will spend most of the game with crap other stats,

Not with double glory, especially if you drop the 1000 cap (which btw, would only be fair). Then APP 20 guy gets 2000 glory for being knighted and so on.

1 hour ago, Morien said:

 

 

and will struggle to win fights and likely suffers more Major Wounds due to low CON.

You place too much emphasis on damage dice. What damage someone does only matters when they win. Now when they start skills will be comparable so, if facing similar opponents they should both win about the same amount of the time. 

1 hour ago, Morien said:

The trade-off is that your character will be worse in the beginning but then catch up and surpass his fellows in the late game, IF he survives that long. If you look at them at the beginning of their careers, this is obvious (assumption: Cymric +3 CON, 60 points and 3 raises to stats, Base Glory 1200):

A: SIZ 18, DEX 10, STR 15, CON 10+3, APP 10, DMG 6d6, HP 32, Move 3, Healing 3, Glory 1200

B: SIZ 18, DEX 10, STR 10, CON 10+3, APP 15, DMG 5d6, HP 32, Move 2, Healing 2, Glory 1800

The difference in skills is moot, since we can assume in this simple comparison that they have exact same skills that increase at the exact same rate. The point is to compare STATS, after all, to see if APP measures up. And it is clear that here, B is clearly the inferior of the two in a fight and survivability. Granted, Move and Heal don't come to play nearly as often as they should, but Healing 3 is a huge improvement when it comes to recovering from Chirurgery Needed, compared to 2. This, at least, B can catch up to quickly enough by increasing his STR (or CON) by one ASAP.

A has a advantage in combat but it's not as signficant as you thing. Against many opponents, such as Bandit, Picts and Saxons, 6d6 is overkill. Against most knights it's an advatage but not a overwhelming one.

 

Also you focus of attributes is the wrong development path for B, It will take him forever to catch up that way. He best option is to work on his skills so he wins more contests and gets his shield when he loses. Now A can do the same, but even if he does skill is still way more important than damage. 

1 hour ago, Morien said:

 We also ignore in this approach the likely assumption that A would gain more Glory from duels and other individual fights, where he would win more frequently than B, and likely get less Major Wounds, too, due to knocking the enemies and wounding them more frequently, making for shorter fights.

I don't think he would win win 50% more duels. How many duels do your PKs fight each year?

Assuming the same skill/glory foes, and equally skilled PKs, if IF A wins 10 duels and B wins 7, B will have earned more glory from duels.

I think Player B catches up by age 25 or so, just from automatic glory. 

 

 

 

 

[Morien]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

Assuming the same skill/glory foes, and equally skilled PKs, if IF A wins 10 duels and B wins 7, B will have earned more glory from duels.

I am talking about BASE Glory, before the multiplier. And yes, the PKs in our campaign do get significant Glory from the heroics that they do themselves. If 5 PKs meet equal number of knights, and one of them cuts down three while the other four manage two, then the glory awards will reflect this: 3 vs. 0.5.

6d6 is very significant edge against other knights, as you will cause much more damage through armor+shield than with 5d6. And other knights is where you get a lot of your Glory. Granted, we are still using the KAP4 style Glory awards, which are more generous than the usual KAP5.2 ones, about x2 (depends on the Glory of the opponent).

I am not claiming that A would win 50% more Total Glory or even 50% of the duels. But even if he only wins 20% more total Glory, this means that he will be at 12k, not 10k, when B hits 10k+5k=15k. Then the difference is only 3 points in Glory Bonus Points, not 5. Hence we are underestimating A's Glory total. The point is that we are being generous in assuming that B gains as much glory from fighting as A, despite being objectively the poorer fighter of the two.

And I repeat again: The idea was to examine WHAT IS THE VALUE OF APP 15 VS STR 15, if APP gives a Glory multiplier of +10% per point above 10. The simplest way to test that is to see how long it would take APP 15 to gather enough Glory to buy his STR up to 15, and assuming everything else stays the same. The idea was not to test what would be the best possible build, since that is a MUCH more difficult task.

You are seriously saying that in 4 years, B would have gained enough extra Glory to make up for lacking 5 stat points? I thought  was a generous GM, but I would be very surprised if they gained more than 2k Glory in 4 years, meaning that B would be, at best, around 5k (2k+1k knighting + inherited etc multiplied by 1.5), meaning 2 extra Glory Bonus Points. Those 2 points would be enough, in your opinion, to make up for the missing 1d6 in damage and 1 point in Healing?

Even if they continue at that very rapid pace, 500 Base Glory per year, It would still take a total of about 18 years for them to hit 10k Base Glory, or around the age of 40. This is very much towards the end of the active adventuring career. We have currently ONE PK who has survived to mid-40s, and he is complaining about his creaking joints (DEX 5) and that he is going to retire any day now...

Even if the break-even point would be sooner, it would be OK. Lets say it happens around 6k Base Glory, about 10 years at 500 Glory gain, with 3 extra Glory Points for B. This is at 31. So for the first ten years, the STR guy has an advantage. For the next ten years, the APP guy has an advantage. Then it is time to start thinking of switching to the heirs. And if the APP guy dies at 28? Well, then his whole career he was worse off, and might actually have died because he would have needed that extra 1d6 damage to hit that Saxon into UNC...

Edited April 10, 2019 by Morien