A question about Eschilles.

[fulk]

RE PKs taking over a county.  In Lordly Domains there is the Adventure of Rydychan (I think that is the name).  The adventure gives the PKs the chance to take over Rydychan by helping the widowed countess there fight off some robber knights. So, the idea has been out there.  Makes for a more political/army-based game. 

 

[Atgxtg]

29 minutes ago, fulk said:

RE PKs taking over a county.  In Lordly Domains there is the Adventure of Rydychan (I think that is the name).  The adventure gives the PKs the chance to take over Rydychan by helping the widowed countess there fight off some robber knights. So, the idea has been out there.  Makes for a more political/army-based game. 

 

If I recall correctly it's more a case of restoring her to power. But even that is failry low powered. Not like controlling a country. The Warlord game adds whole new levels of story and plot to things. It also takes away some stuff too. Major Nobles and their Officers probably won't be adventuring much. 

[fulk]

I think there are options to how you play it.  Either way, you still have a marriageable countess and no male leader for the county. That said, if you use Warlords, counties aren't really integral units that one person can control, but there would be lordships that are vacant in the same way. 

RE adventuring.  YPMV.  Through the early years, PK lords can certainly lead armies in the big battles and engage in politics. I have found that fun.  As for adventuring, I don't really see any problem with it.  Many of Arthur's knights who go adventuring are great land owners.  It just comes down to how you want to play (historical reality is a different matter).

[Atgxtg]

4 minutes ago, fulk said:

I think there are options to how you play it.  Either way, you still have a marriageable countess and no male leader for the county. That said, if you use Warlords, counties aren't really integral units that one person can control, but there would be lordships that are vacant in the same way. 

Definitely. 

4 minutes ago, fulk said:

RE adventuring.  YPMV.  Through the early years, PK lords can certainly lead armies in the big battles and engage in politics. I have found that fun.  As for adventuring, I don't really see any problem with it.  Many of Arthur's knights who go adventuring are great land owners.  It just comes down to how you want to play (historical reality is a different matter).

I've had a PK Pennath (Minor King, really an Estate Holder in KAP5) in a previous campaign and the big game did tend to take PK away from the typical adventuring knight game. For instance he had to avoid a lot of tournaments as his ransom could bankrupt him. It's much easier for a knight to acquire and  tuck away 18 libra from adventuring than it is for a major noble to accumulate a comparative amount of wealth.To get big money they have to act on a bigger scale.Ransom is a gamer changer here. Both to the PK lord who must pay it, and to anyone under him or who captures him. It paints a big target on the noble's back. 

That's what hurts the adventuring. If a PK vassal knight has a run of bad luck and has to pay a couple of ransoms, he might be broke, but probably can pay it and still have enough left over to continue on. If it happens to a major noble, he's in deep trouble. Just organizing and sending the ransom is a major logistics problem, and a financial burden on all of his vassals. For the most part the rewards aren't worth the risk. 

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, Hzark10 said:

Agreed.

It's much like with the ladies campaign. More emphasis on court. Probably more emphasis on battles too, as capturing a manor or three over a summer becomes a real option. Less small scale stuff, as it would take a greater rewards to merit the risk, or move the needle. Fifty libra is a small fortune to a knight, but will barely keep even a minor lord's entourage fed for a year.

[Rowelio]

Haven't checked this in a while - a lot to read an unpack haha. 

Yeah In my game the way I've been running it has a huge emphasis on Courtly Process and Battles - adventuring isn't a huge part of how we've been playing - it's been mainly the party being separate in their own lands until they're all united at Courts or any Musters that they're required to come to. I've got Six Players now - It's all their first time playing this system but they're all really enjoying the way i've been running it. I've found the book and all the supplements can be a bit overhwelming and dense at times - so I've been slowly adding in additional rules as we play - rather than having my players bone up on all the books prior to starting our campaign. 

I started them off with Estates worth 50 - based on the starting 10 librum manors - Woodford, Tisbury etc and I have it kinda done in a way where Roderick commands the largest personal portion of all his eschilles - and the rest is commanded by a few of the player knights (a few were awarded with the title of banneret by King Uther for capturing King Octa) Sir Hywel, Sir Elad and Sir Amig. They're basically my games 'Council of Knight Lords' who have heavy political swing at court when it comes to decisions of Salisbury. Roderick ofc, makes all the decisions at the end of the day - and I'm using this as sort of a tutorial for my players so that when the anarchy hits they'll be more political and leadership focused to help fill the gap. 

I'm expecting a full player wipe when the big ol' poison-fest kicks in(couple sessions away now) - and following that I've written a few fun ideas where their lands are in heavy dispute - between their Heir character, and Jealous Knights who want to seize their power in this time of weakness.