APP

[Atgxtg]

5 minutes ago, Morien said:

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.

Ah, that's a big difference right there. Our groups generally split the glory for such encounters. 

5 minutes ago, Morien said:

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.

But if he wins 20% more glory then he falling behind in the glory game. 

5 minutes ago, Morien said:

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.

Yes, and where we disagree is on how much of an advantage that 15 STR is. In part because of the type of adventures we run and the distribution of glory. If the PKs face off against a lot of bandtis, picts and Saxons, then the difference between 5d6 and 6d6 isn't that significant. Both will usually drop such opponents with a major wound,and the rest is overkill.

Against knights the advatage is more signficant, but not equal to a 50% glory increase. In fact, against knight 6d6 is often a determent, as it tends to reduce the ransom money, which in turn can lead to other improvements that can offset the extra damage die, like better armor or a better horse. And a clever PK will try to maximize his strengths. They both do the same damage in a lance charge. 

 

5 minutes ago, Morien said:

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?

Yes, because most of those extra stat points don't mean that much. SIZ and CON affect HP, KD and MW, so each point of those are gold. But STR is not so important. Once you hit the But next damage die the rest is generally wasted. Yes a higher healing rate helps, but it isn't as important as it once was. 

All High APP guy has to do is catch up in damage dice not in stats. 

 

5 minutes ago, Morien said:

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.

Which doesn't matter. If you are assuming that "they continue at that very rapid pace, 500 Base Glory per year" then APP 15 will continue at 750 glory ayear. So in 4 year if A has earn 2000 Glory. B has earned 3000.

Once 15 APP catches up on damage dice then the difference in STR won't be  isn't as significant, but the difference in APP will. So it really turns into whatever else 6d6 guy did with his points and time. 

5 minutes ago, Morien said:

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...

But you assuming that the high APP character stays the same. What I'm saying it catching up in damage doesn't take that long, if a PK makes an effort towards doing so. 

For instance, you noted that your PKs tend to improve their SIZ with the free picks during chargen, now what if 15 APP guy used that to help catchup to 6d6? And it's much easier for a low stat guy to raise his attributes than a high stat guy, as the high stat guy is going to run into the caps. SIZ 18, STR 15 can only boost STR by 3 points with T&P before needing 3000 glory to to reach 7d6. But High APP guy can get to 6d6 in 5 years of training and practice alone. Three years if he gets 2000 glory to spend. Now yes 6d6 can spend his T&P time and glory to improve as well, but him going from SIZ 18, STR 15 to SIZ 20, STR 18  won't help as much as APP 15 guy going from SIZ 18, STR 10 to SIZ 18 STR 15. 

 

5 minutes ago, Morien said:

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...

The problem I have with this is that base glory can vary significantly between PKS. Someone with the religious bonus is getting at least 180 more glory a year than someone who doesn't. Factor in for APP and it would be 270 glory per year. That's a glory point every 4 years right there. A character with the religious and chivalry bonus is probably pushing 400 a year, which would be upped to 600. So those characters with high traits and passions would benefit more from high APP. There is your 2000 glory in 4 years right there, and that's all personal.

I think +10% per point of APP would destroy the random chargen method completely, and increasing the mini-maxing. 

 

 

[Khanwulf]

13 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

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. 

I like this. Bling that is bright enough to out-shine the fantastic beauty of such creatures is going to be expensive, indeed. And when done up someone like Guen is literally wearing a king's ransom in treasure. So the cost would be: (Base APP + tailoring and hairdo + jewelry + magic) x L = +1 jewelry point, repeat for each jewelry point. So you cannot layer on cheap stuff and then do the rest of your outfit and expect it to work. (It might backfire, in fact.)

@Morien you talk about a request table, but that seems awfully random for what should be "my husband has helped you so please take that into consideration." Now... the magnitude of the consideration is open to rolls, and here's a possible way to roll with it:

1. Goodwill points are accumulated by succeeding in rolls over time, like Libra.

2. When attempting to influence a decision (either before or during the decision), you may bid Goodwill versus a target based on the magnitude of the modifier you're aiming for. Flat-out bribing the target as part of this can provide additional Goodwill, but how much will depend on the existing wealth of the target. (For example,: if you're attempting to bribe Uther into letting you manage the Duchy for your infant nephew you may need to sock him with 900+L, as occurs in BoU.)

3. Roll an appropriate opposed skill to make your case (Orate, Intrigue) versus Suspicious. A critical may provide bonus Goodwill to your request.

4. Roll Goodwill versus a target the GM decides according to a) magnitude of modifier sought + b) any countering Goodwill being used on this decision by competitors you may or may not be aware of. Failure wastes your effort and bribes but not the Goodwill you bid. Success provides the modifier sought and expends Goodwill. Critical success provides the modifier sought and returns half the bid Goodwill. Critical failure sacrifices bid Goodwill and inverts the bonus sought (making it a penalty). The target may also acquire a Suspicious direct trait toward you.

5. Make the roll against the decision table using the modifier acquired (such as marriage, etc.).

 

On APP providing a bonus to glory income: if +10% per APP over 10 is too much, how much per point is appropriate? +5%?

(Perhaps a Social Bonus (SB)derived attribute of APP/3 that adds to skills used where your appearance can be brought to bear, plus glory gain from skill use of +10%xSB?)

 

--Khanwulf

 

[Atgxtg]

Oh, and there is also the fact that having more glory tends to lead to more oppurtunities to get more glory and that 10% of the glory passes down to the son.

So in a generation or two the cumulative effect with be devastating. 

[Atgxtg]

1 minute ago, Khanwulf said:

 

 

 

 like this. Bling that is bright enough to out-shine the fantastic beauty of such creatures is going to be expensive, indeed. And when done up someone like Guen is literally wearing a king's ransom in treasure. So the cost would be: (Base APP + tailoring and hairdo + jewelry + magic) x L = +1 jewelry point, repeat for each jewelry point. So you cannot layer on cheap stuff and then do the rest of your outfit and expect it to work. (It might backfire, in fact.)

@Morien you talk about a request table, but that seems awfully random for what should be "my husband has helped you so please take that into consideration." Now... the magnitude of the consideration is open to rolls, and here's a possible way to roll with it:

1. Goodwill points are accumulated by succeeding in rolls over time, like Libra.

2. When attempting to influence a decision (either before or during the decision), you may bid Goodwill versus a target based on the magnitude of the modifier you're aiming for. Flat-out bribing the target as part of this can provide additional Goodwill, but how much will depend on the existing wealth of the target. (For example,: if you're attempting to bribe Uther into letting you manage the Duchy for your infant nephew you may need to sock him with 900+L, as occurs in BoU.)

Two questions:

1. Does 1 point of Goodwill equal to £1 for this purpose? In you example could someone who had 450 points of Goodwill spend 450 Goodwill and £450 to reach the £900 target?

2. What happens if someone loses the bid? Are the good will points lost? Do they comeback? Or something in between?

1 minute ago, Khanwulf said:

On APP providing a bonus to glory income: if +10% per APP over 10 is too much, how much per point is appropriate? +5%?

Good question. I think it depends on just how important glory is. In theory glory is the main goal of the game. In practice, less so, and sometimes you can get more glory by focusing on other things that will make glory accumulation easier later on. 

Plus Glory is one of the things that passes down to sons./Yes it's  10% but even going with Morien's 10K/15K examples, thats 500 more starting glory. Or 750 if the son is also a looker. So if the sons start out with 1000 and 1750 glory respectively, my money is on 1750 hitting 2K first and 3K as well. That means getting more bonuses to rolls netting more glory (which gets multiplied),  drawing extra cards at feasts (leading to more geniality, which in turn gets converted to glory and multiplied) and so on. So it becomes a compound effect.  Now I think 1000 glory make much more of a difference at the low wend of the scale than the high end. 

 

 

But I think I'm opposed to the basic concept. I just don't believe that Sir Adonis (APP 20) defeating Sir Respectable (2000 Glory) is equal to Sir Pigface (APP5) defeating Sir Reknown (6000) Glory.  Of that Sir Adionis slaying a small giant would be viewed equally as Sir Pigace slaying a fire breathing wyrm . Now maybe some people might be impressed with Adonis straight teeth, curly hair and piecing blue eyes, but does that make a small giant  equal slaying a fire breathing wyrm?

And if Air Adonis doesn't go out an slay anything one year does that his look only matter when he earns glory doing something else? 

And nothing else that awards glory in the game works that way. A religious knight doesn't get more glory for dispatching a fiend that one who isn't. It all just seems wrong, and multiplier are dangerous.Even the 1000 point cap came about because of the glory multipliers in the BoB2. And APP would make that so much worse. 

 

 

 

 

[Morien]

56 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

5. Make the roll against the decision table using the modifier acquired (such as marriage, etc.).

This is the table I was talking about. Guidelines for the GM what the roll should be if you want to become, say, Castellan. What is the target number for different offices that I need to roll, probably 1d6+modifiers (1d20 is way too random), in order to get appointed to that office? And this can of course be expanded to also include an influence roll to ease the previous occupant to pasture...

55 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Oh, and there is also the fact that having more glory tends to lead to more oppurtunities to get more glory and that 10% of the glory passes down to the son.

Pretty insignificant, thanks to that 10%. Even at 10k BASE Glory, the excess Glory is only 5k, which translates to 500 extra Inherited Glory for the Son. If the Son has APP 15 too, then it is 750 Glory, but remember, he PAID for that Glory multiplier with stat points. It is not a free lunch.

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

The problem I have with this is that base glory can vary significantly between PKS. Someone with the religious bonus is getting at least 180 more glory a year than someone who doesn't. Factor in for APP and it would be 270 glory per year. That's a glory point every 4 years right there. A character with the religious and chivalry bonus is probably pushing 400 a year, which would be upped to 600. So those characters with high traits and passions would benefit more from high APP. There is your 2000 glory in 4 years right there, and that's all personal. 

You have a tendency of ignoring the fact that all of the above takes effort to gain (save for the 80+ Chivalric, which is pretty automatic if a Player wants it...). In short, you probably had to spend yearly trainings or Glory Points to get the Traits to 16+ to qualify for the Religious Bonus. Hence, you fall behind. Even if we assume that both characters would go for the as large passive glory as possible (as an aside, I really, really dislike passive Glory that accrues from sitting on your ass at home...), you ignore what the APP 10 character would have gained in the same time. In the four years, the APP 10 would be at 1600 Glory, the APP 15 at 2400 Glory, gained from passive Glory in the above example. This is a difference of mere 800 Glory, compared to the difference of 1d6 in damage and 1 in Healing.

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

But you assuming that the high APP character stays the same. What I'm saying it catching up in damage doesn't take that long, if a PK makes an effort towards doing so. 

And those points have to come from SOMEWHERE. That is the point I have been trying to make!

I set out very simple criteria:

1. Both used the same number of stat points in the Chargen, one with STR 15, the other with APP 15.

2. I assumed that the skill & trait progression would be similar, to simplify things. This means that the yearly training and experience rolls can be discounted. (Although I did point out that if you deviate from this, the APP 15 has an edge, as Glory Points are more versatile.)

3. This leaves only Glory Points that can be used to catch up to STR 15 and 6d6. So, how much Glory does it take to get 5k extra glory at +50%? The answer, 10k.

I guess I should have been even more explicit. This is what the characters would look at 10k BASE Glory (assuming that any MWs and Aging have been dealt with):

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

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

Now clearly B is winning the Glory Game, and is equal physically to A. That is the whole point of his character concept! In order to achieve that, he is not minmaxed for the fighting from the get-go, but he will surpass his fellow on the long run. He is BETTER at 10k Base Glory. But he is WORSE at the beginning. It is mages and fighters from AD&D. One starts as a paper tissue with one weak spell and ends up twisting Reality to suit his whims. One starts big and brawny and swinging a big sword... and arguably ends up exactly the same, in proportion.

19 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Now maybe some people might be impressed with Adonis straight teeth, curly hair and piecing blue eyes, but does that make a small giant  equal slaying a fire breathing wyrm? 

Tabloids point to yes. Pretty people get more press. Granted, pretty & famous people get even more press, but adding a Glory multiplier based on your Glory is a very bad idea.

The handwavey explanation behind the APP multiplier is that everyone is more keen on talking about Sir Adonis and his glorious deeds, again and again. That is where the multiplier comes in. Sir Pigface... eh, yeah, he killed some lizard or another, but let's talk more about Sir Adonis, he is so dreamy.

EDIT:

Also, just to clarify, I am not arguing for this to become the new APP rule. I am simply discussing it, since it would be a very simple implementation, without any additional rules for APP, since its effect would be included to the Glory.

Edited April 10, 2019 by Morien

[Atgxtg]

 

4 minutes ago, Morien said:

Pretty insignificant, thanks to that 10%. Even at 10k BASE Glory, the excess Glory is only 5k, which translates to 500 extra Inherited Glory for the Son. If the Son has APP 15 too, then it is 750 Glory, but remember, he PAID for that Glory multiplier with stat points. It is not a free lunch.

No, it's an investment, and it will pay back dividends. 

4 minutes ago, Morien said:

You have a tendency of ignoring the fact that all of the above takes effort to gain (save for the 80+ Chivalric, which is pretty automatic if a Player wants it...).

Because they might not take much effort. If the players use the random chargen method then hitting a a bonus becomes a bit erratic but generally more common than by the standard method. And as you point out the old 80 point chivarly threshold is there is the PK wants it. Since it takes high traits to get that we can assume something like 150 glory per year for that, time 1.5 so that 75 extra glory per year right there. 

4 minutes ago, Morien said:

In short, you probably had to spend yearly trainings or Glory Points to get the Traits to 16+ to qualify for the Religious Bonus. Hence, you fall behind.

In short no you don't. First off there is the random chrgen method, which used to be the default. There there is just the luck of the dice and improvement rolls, or spending money for teachers and improvements that grant extra checks and rolls. 

4 minutes ago, Morien said:

Even if we assume that both characters would go for the as large passive glory as possible (as an aside, I really, really dislike passive Glory that accrues from sitting on your ass at home...)

I would assume that the high APP character would be more likely to go for the passive glory because he gets a greater return for his effort.

4 minutes ago, Morien said:

, you ignore what the APP 10 character would have gained in the same time. In the four years, the APP 10 would be at 1600 Glory, the APP 15 at 2400 Glory, gained from passive Glory in the above example. This is a difference of mere 800 Glory, compared to the difference of 1d6 in damage and 1 in Healing.

It's also a not so mere  1 bonus point. But that's assuming they are both early equal glory pre multiplier and I don't think that will be the case. The high APP knight will probably focus on passive glory and court events, where his APP and higher glory will help him. So he will be succeeding at more courtly skills, earn more skill checks,  earn more glory, and improve faster. It's self perpetuating.

For instance, both knights will marry, but the high APP one will tend to be more successful at it thanks to a higher modifier from glory and possibly APP, higher court skills (due to the bonuses from APP glory resulting in more successful courtly skill rolls, more check and higher skills) and will probably not only get a wife with more glory, but would multiply that yet again.  And as the characters continue to play the additional glory and skill check will make the high APP guy much better at netting glory at court than the extra d6 will as far as combat glory goes.

The 1 healing sin't all that significant. At least not in the 2-3 range. Players normally go on one adventure per year, and HR only really matters if someone gets major wounded or has fight multiple fights spread out over several weeks. 

 

4 minutes ago, Morien said:

And those points have to come from SOMEWHERE. That is the point I have been trying to make!

I set out very simple criteria:

Yes, but they are not an actuate presentation of the situation. You assume that traits and skill progression would be similar. I don;'t believe that to be true. The high APP character is going to concentrate his efforts towards the things that high high APP helps him at, not just play the same as the 6d6 guy.

The 15 APP guy doesn't have to use Glory points to catch up with STR but could use training and practice to do so. 

 

4 minutes ago, Morien said:

Now clearly B is winning the Glory Game, and is equal physically to A. That is the whole point of his character concept! In order to achieve that, he is not minmaxed for the fighting from the get-go, but he will surpass his fellow on the long run. He is BETTER at 10k Base Glory. But he is WORSE at the beginning.

Where we disagree is at what point B catches up with A's advantages. And I think that it will be  long before the 10K mark.

4 minutes ago, Morien said:

 

It is mages and fighters from AD&D. One starts as a paper tissue with one weak spell and ends up twisting Reality to suit his whims. One starts big and brawny and swinging a big sword... and arguably ends up exactly the same, in proportion.

Arguably is the key term. A better example would be thieves and fighter in original D&D. Fighter were better fighters at the same level but thieves leveled faster and eventually passed fighters on the combat table. Thats why AD&D gave each class its own combat matrix.

What I'm saying is that the same sort of thing will happen with glory and that it will happen faster that you think it will, because the high APP character is going to go after as much of that passive glory that you don't like.

 

4 minutes ago, Morien said:

Tabloids point to yes. Pretty people get more press. Granted, pretty & famous people get even more press, but adding a Glory multiplier based on your Glory is a very bad idea.

The handwavey explanation behind the APP multiplier is that everyone is more keen on talking about Sir Adonis and his glorious deeds, again and again. That is where the multiplier comes in. Sir Pigface... eh, yeah, he killed some lizard or another, but let's talk more about Sir Adonis, he is so dreamy.

I just don't see that as being how it would work. For instance in the literature we get a lot more info on what the knights did as opposed to how they looked doing it.

4 minutes ago, Morien said:

EDIT:

Also, just to clarify, I am not arguing for this to become the new APP rule. I am simply discussing it, since it would be a very simple implementation, without any additional rules for APP, since its effect would be included to the Glory.

 

Yeah, we're just debating ideas. That's cool. I just don't like that idea, for several reasons. I certainly would like to see APP become more important (I started this thread), but I think that a glory multiplier would be a bad idea. Especially if players develop their character to  towards it, which they will. It will be like the typical KAP SIZ problem. Those who opt for it will push the envelope as far as they can. 

And I think we have to look at chargen and see just what a PK can do with this if he had the chance. Most of the players in my groups focus on getting Sword to 20 ASAP. Winning more often and getting your shield all the time more than offsets a damage die. Lance chargers use the horse's damage. So there are a lot of ways for a PK to offset or negate  that extra d6 damage, and I thin a clever player, going into this this will work things out to mitigate his weaknesses and maximize his glory.

 

[Khanwulf]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

Two questions:

1. Does 1 point of Goodwill equal to £1 for this purpose? In you example could someone who had 450 points of Goodwill spend 450 Goodwill and £450 to reach the £900 target?

2. What happens if someone loses the bid? Are the good will points lost? Do they comeback? Or something in between?

Good question. I think it depends on just how important glory is. In theory glory is the main goal of the game. In practice, less so, and sometimes you can get more glory by focusing on other things that will make glory accumulation easier later on.

 

But I think I'm opposed to the basic concept.

The assumption I'm working from is that Goodwill can be monetized as L for this purpose, only, keeping in mind that the marginal value of one L decreases as you rise in rank. Thus, you could consider bribes as less effective on higher-ranking individuals (nobles, churchmen, etc.). I'd apply a divisor to bribe amounts in order to bring them down to parity, maybe:

Knight - 1 G - 1L

Baron - 1 G - 3L

Earl - 1 G - 10L

Duke - 1 G - 30L

King - 1 G - 90L

I'm just throwing numbers at the wall here, but this progression would create a +10 G effect from the bribe to Uther, plus whatever Goodwill she might have had or been able to generate from scraping up allies. (Something I forgot to mention.) Point being that if you want to influence a king, etc., you better bring what they value, which is usually personal and not material.

We need a way to ensure that Goodwill is only applied from appropriate source. A knight is not going to influence the king unless he can bring to bear resources within the king's circle. 

@Morien I understand your use of "table" here and fully agree. I'd call them guidelines, but you're visualizing a table and that's fine.

On APP and rumors: the point is that Sir Timberlake is pleasant to consider and repeating how he's done such-and-such great deed magnifies the impact of that success. It does not detract from Sir Homely and his new dragon-head trophy, which will be talked about in proportion to the difficulty of the lizard-extermination feat. This dynamic is clearly a thing that humans do. We really do pay more attention to the beautiful and listen to them over the plain. Similarly, dress and wealth displays do raise momentary regard and add weight to someone's presentation. 

It's real. It isn't remotely fair. But it's how both the sources and real life work.

It's also not modeled in KAP, and that's why there's a discussion. What is the right weight? Dunno.

 

--Khanwulf

[Edit: to the challenge of the sources, some of the handsomest knights were also the most glorious, with exceptions for individuals who offset that by being exceptionally vigorous in their deeds or bearing--like Lancelot.]

Edited April 10, 2019 by Khanwulf

[Atgxtg]

1 minute ago, Khanwulf said:

The assumption I'm working from is that Goodwill can be monetized as L for this purpose, only, keeping in mind that the marginal value of one L decreases as you rise in rank.

I kinda got that with the 900 libra bribe in you previous example. I just anted to be sure it was a 1-to-1 relationship. 

6 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

I'd apply a divisor to bribe amounts in order to bring them down to parity

Don't I think something like getting a dukedome as a favor should require such a huge investiture of goodwill and libra that it becomes the payoff of a life's worth, or several years income for a major nobleman. If you apply a divsor then household knights could start to expert a disproportionate amount of influence. 

 

You might want to use the glory award table as a guide for "favors'. 

Trivial Favors: 1G or L

Ordinary Favors: 10G/L

Heroic Favors: 100G/L

Very Heroic Favors: 250G/L

Extraordinary Favor: 1000G/L

 

So the Duekdom deal at 900G/L was pretty close to extraordinary.

 

 

[Sir Mad Munkee]

I'd just apply a modifier – maybe +1 for each point of APP above 15? – to all skills where APP might make a difference: definitely Flirting, maybe Orate, Sing and Play Instrument, Intrigue and Courtesy at GM's discretion, etc. High APP doesn't mean someone is technically better at these things, but they are likely to get a better reaction from the people they're interacting with.

Edited April 15, 2019 by Sir Mad Munkee

[Atgxtg]

5 hours ago, Sir Mad Munkee said:

I'd just apply a modifier – maybe +1 for each point of APP above 15? – to all skills where APP might make a difference: definitely Flirting, maybe Orate, Sing and Play Instrument, Intrigue and Courtesy at GM's discretion, etc. High APP doesn't mean someone is technically better at these things, but they are likely to get a better reaction from the people they're interacting with.

Apparently that's what Greg was moving towards, as Ringan pointed out with the info from the nocturnal forum.

I wonder if that should apply to DEX now too? It's not much better than APP. Most of it's uses are pretty much not an option for PKs due to armor, and the one thing that is it really useful for, knockdown, is often superseded by Horsemanship. The double feint is gone, so there isn't much of a benefit for it. It comes in useful when someone's weapon breaks and they have to rearm, or in they are grappling, but that's about it.

 

[Khanwulf]

17 hours ago, Sir Mad Munkee said:

I'd just apply a modifier – maybe +1 for each point of APP above 15? – to all skills where APP might make a difference: definitely Flirting, maybe Orate, Sing and Play Instrument, Intrigue and Courtesy at GM's discretion, etc. High APP doesn't mean someone is technically better at these things, but they are likely to get a better reaction from the people they're interacting with.

That's what I was getting at as well. However I do get concerned about the effect of that +1/point over 15 from characters with very high APP scores--the "face" PK or lady, or how even NPLs that approach Guen and Ygraine can crush everyone without trying using courtly skills. 

Maybe it's not a big deal if you make the real tests into opposed checks? As is done in combat?

Mmmm. Social combat.... 

 

--Khanwulf

[Atgxtg]

15 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

That's what I was getting at as well. However I do get concerned about the effect of that +1/point over 15 from characters with very high APP scores--the "face" PK or lady, or how even NPLs that approach Guen and Ygraine can crush everyone without trying using courtly skills. 

Just to help visual this, here is a comparison between +1 per point over 15 and Morien's idea of +1 per 2 points over 11. 

	APP	+1/pt >15	+1 per 2pts >11		APP	+1/pt >15	+1 per 2pts >11
	15	+0	+2		28	+13	+9
	16	+1	+3		29	+14	+9
	17	+2	+3		30	+15	+10
	18	+3	+4		31	+16	+10
	19	+4	+4		32	+17	+11
	20	+5	+5		33	+18	+11
	21	+6	+5		34	+19	+12
	22	+7	+6		35	+20	+12
	23	+8	+6		36	+21	+13
	24	+9	+7		37	+22	+13
	25	+10	+7		38	+23	+14
	26	+11	+8		39	+24	+14
	27	+12	+8		40	+25	+15

 

15 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

Maybe it's not a big deal if you make the real tests into opposed checks? As is done in combat?

That's what I did with the horse breeding and training to anticipate a PK trying to become the horse king with a ultra high Horsemanship skill.

15 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

Mmmm. Social combat.... 

Possible if you have stakes. 

Another option might be to use the social skill as a form of hit points. Then the high APP could be burnt off as damage. 

 

 

[Hzark10]

9 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

a comparison between +1 per point over 15 and Morien's idea of +1 per 2 points over 11. 

At what point would you say the "face of an angel, face to face with a divine being, awe-struck,etc" kick in?  What would be your defence against such mechanics?  The one point per will be more powerful than the +1 per 2, but what I would be looking for, is how to defend against such, or how to prevent yourself from becoming putty in someone else's hands. The system that would give a bonus to success because of APP, also needs a mechanic on how to override it. IMHO.

[Atgxtg]

6 minutes ago, Hzark10 said:

At what point would you say the "face of an angel, face to face with a divine being, awe-struck,etc" kick in?  What would be your defence against such mechanics?  The one point per will be more powerful than the +1 per 2, but what I would be looking for, is how to defend against such, or how to prevent yourself from becoming putty in someone else's hands. The system that would give a bonus to success because of APP, also needs a mechanic on how to override it. IMHO.

Well, as Morien pointed out previously, the "Guinevere Effect" is incredibly overpowering, and probably not something that should fall into the hands of most players. Otherwise they will besootle just about every male knight, baron and king, they can. One feast and they might wind up with a hoard of ardent admiriers.

Game mechanics wise, the two women wo get this effect in KAP are Guinivere and Ygraine, and they both have APP 39-40, so it probably kicks in with a 39 APP (the point where an APP is an auto critical). Now we were talking about the idea of a critical APP roll triggering the effect, but even a woman with a 16 APP would have a 5% chance of success and she would have no reason not to try it. So it probably looks like the effect kicks in at around APP 39 (coincidentally where APP rolls are automatic critical successes)

[Hzark10]

That is what I have been using as well.  So far, no one has played a woman who is striving for that lofty goal, but as a completist, I want to see if codified into the rules.  Even if it is just YPMV.

[Atgxtg]

41 minutes ago, Hzark10 said:

That is what I have been using as well.  So far, no one has played a woman who is striving for that lofty goal, but as a completist, I want to see if codified into the rules.  Even if it is just YPMV.

Well, since Karnwulf is handling that bit, it will be his call. I doubt it will be codified, maybe put in a sidebar, or something. The problem is that it is mostly unplayable. The GM would have to check for every male character the player ran into, and keep a record for  the rest of the campaign. It's one thing to note if all the PKs have seen Guenevere before, but much more different to note all the ladies they may have met throughout the course of the campaign. And since ladies are non combatants losses in SIZ, STR and CON from aging doesn't reduce their abilities to the same extent it does for male characters. So you could have to track this stuff for quite some time. And that's just the bookeeping aspect of it.

From a play perspective, it could pose some serous complications with a woman having all those knights and nobles wrapped around her finger. Could she start (or stop) a war? Maybe completely disrupt the whole timeline? A female player who could win over Lancelot or Mordred early on (before Lance's Amor become unbeatable) could theoretically prevent the whole downfall. A Lancelot who found another woman instead of Guenevere, or a Mordred who was in love and convinced to "be nice" could lead the game down an entirely different path.

[Hzark10]

But, Morgana would then try different tactics as well.  But, as you said, it is a lot of book-keeping if one deigns to do it.  Personally, I would keep the timeline as close as possible, unless or until the players try to change it and then decide what would change.

Depending on the players, I have deviated from the canon timeline on a couple of occasions.

[Khanwulf]

4 hours ago, Hzark10 said:

But, Morgana would then try different tactics as well.  But, as you said, it is a lot of book-keeping if one deigns to do it.  Personally, I would keep the timeline as close as possible, unless or until the players try to change it and then decide what would change.

Depending on the players, I have deviated from the canon timeline on a couple of occasions.

Generally, the opinion has been that the whole "pretty aura" thing has to go. It really shouldn't be in there at all, and can be roll-played out if needed.

GM: "You see the hawtest lady you've ever seen."

PK: Hawt or haut?

GM: Hawt. She would be a royal tumble for sure. Roll Lustful for how appealing this thought is....

PK: Sounds fair--*dice*

That'd be enough. And then maybe hand out directed traits and Amor if a PK puts their heart on it. But as Atgxtg points out, the administrative task of tracking who has met the PL, what their rolls were and etc. is way, WAY too much. 

Now. If you have a pretty lady who wants to bend mythic history to their whim, and the player who's driving that decision, then by all means let them. But warn that in doing so they have set themselves against currents of fate that are strong enough to rip the greatest heroes of the age up by their roots and fling an age of man's glory into an echo of story and song. 

You might make Mordred "nice", but he's still going to be standing on the field at Camlann, flustered at his uncle and some snake of a man who advised him Arthur was dead.

Back to APP: I think overall I'd prefer the (APP-11)/2 calculation, as that results in a +10 bonus at 30 APP. Equivalent to an all-out attack bonus. Then 40 APP is +15, equivalent to an all-out attack from horseback. You need guidelines for how APP and courtly skills can be used to manipulate others (men and women) and what happens if it's overdone.

The sources have incidents where knights are overcome by beauty or whatnot, but that's usually a result of a passion that they developed for someone. If you hand the reins to the ladies, and say "do something in order build a amor in yon knight." Then you've returned agency to the women and established a relationship that could be resisted if desired. (Dinadan had none of all this, IIRC.)

 

--Khanwulf

[Atgxtg]

Yeah, it's a great ability, but to make it playable it would need to have some sort of limits. It works for Ygraine because it shows why Uther acts the way he does to get her, and it works for Gwen, because it shows why everybody falls for her. 

 

But for a player to be able to just show up at Court and have half the Barons of the realm tripping over each other to do her bidding is just too much. Maybe if there was a cap (like totual soutors Glory limited to 1000xAPP) for players.

[Atgxtg]

58 minutes ago, Khanwulf said:

Back to APP: I think overall I'd prefer the (APP-11)/2 calculation, as that results in a +10 bonus at 30 APP. Equivalent to an all-out attack bonus. Then 40 APP is +15, equivalent to an all-out attack from horseback. You need guidelines for how APP and courtly skills can be used to manipulate others (men and women) and what happens if it's overdone.

It does seem more playable. Although one radical idea I had was to dicth the starting skill tables and just have courtly skills all start at something like APP/3 or even APP/2. Melee skills could start at twice the Move rate (since that is STR and DEX based), and so on. So when the base stats went up a few points, the related skills would go up a point. 

It could simplify chargen, and make DEX and APP much more significant. 

[Morien]

9 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Although one radical idea I had was to dicth the starting skill tables and just have courtly skills all start at something like APP/3 or even APP/2. Melee skills could start at twice the Move rate (since that is STR and DEX based), and so on. So when the base stats went up a few points, the related skills would go up a point. 

In our Middle-earth campaign, the above is roughly what I did: most of the courtly & people skills started out with the value of APP/2. In addition, any skill glory gained from them was equal to APP rather than flat 10 Glory. It worked out just fine. While the original plan was to have later raises of APP affect the skill, this proved to be a bit too much of a hassle to keep track, and we ditched that part. Instead, what your APP was at adulthood (20, in that campaign) gave you the skill base and after that, the effect of stats on skills was ignored.

For weapon skills, we used a flat default of 10. The reasoning was that some of the combat training would default over, and that this would make it easier for knights to pick up new weapons rather than waste yearly trainings bringing skills to at least potentially usable levels. However, I could very easily see starting them out as 5+DEX/2, instead. I would not use Move rate, since I think STR is already useful enough, as it contributes to healing, move and most importantly, damage. But 5+DEX/2 would give DEX a bit more oomph, even if it would be only at chargen.

Finally, we used skillpoint pools rather than '1 skill at 15, 3 skills at 10', which would have sidestepped the raised starting values completely. Hence, someone who was going to specialize playing a courtier had an incentive to start with high APP and then patch up his combat prowess later.

 

[TerryTroll]

On 4/5/2019 at 1:57 PM, Atgxtg said:

As most know, APP doesn't get used all that much in KAP. It determines distinctive features,

We found that alone was surprisingly significant in our game. 

We had one character dump stat Appearance, having it at only 6. He ended up with a high pitched, lisp and excessively hairy.

We don't make him do the voice all the time, but every now and again when he is trying to do a speech or romance a maiden we tell him to say it again in the proper voice. Inspired from the clip below.

Then he wonders why he never does well at orate.

[Morien]

52 minutes ago, TerryTroll said:

We don't make him do the voice all the time, but every now and again when he is trying to do a speech or romance a maiden we tell him to say it again in the proper voice. Inspired from the clip below.

Ah, so you apply a modifier to the Orate roll based on the distinctive features or just say that he fails unless he rolls a critical?

[TerryTroll]

No, I'm not that cruel, really we just like having a laugh at the player doing the voice. 

[Atgxtg]

2 hours ago, TerryTroll said:

We found that alone was surprisingly significant in our game. 

Only becuase you houseruled it to be so. There is nothing in the RAW about APP doing that. Although

2 hours ago, TerryTroll said:

...He ended up with a high pitched, lisp.

would certainly merit one. 

2 hours ago, TerryTroll said:

Then he wonders why he never does well at orate.

Can he ?