Hello! New here, though I've lurked for a bit and combed through older topics to soak in Pendragoniness. :) I've been playing through GPC on a solo campaign using Mythic GME, and three questions have been bugging me on and off -- I've done some basic internet-research on it, but come up with nothing definitive.

On literacy: Is there also any reading/writing in ... I'm assuming Old English? Though admittedly questions of language aren't particularly important in Pendragon, given the tradition -- but if there's a separate writing system for Latin/Ogham/Runic/etc., does one exist for the lay tongue? Or does a system for writing Old English/lay tongue simply not exist yet, and any writing is only going to be in the aforementioned scripts?

If that is the case, how are messages passed? Oral reports via messengers, or dictating the letter to a scribe if the recipient can read/also has a scribe to read it aloud? (I've basically been treating it as mostly the former, as I suspect that would be cheaper and easier than hunting down a scribe or a monk.)

On homosexuality: Thanks to the way Mythic works, I discovered recently that one of the NPC knights is gay. Given as said NPC (Sir Magarin) is currently the target for a smear campaign by a particularly unscrupulous lady (he killed her cousin Sir Bledoc), if she finds out, she will gleefully out him. I'm pretty certain that, while homosociality and male bonding is held in high regard, homosexual acts are heavily frowned upon. Just a guess. :) But what kind of effects would it have on his status? Would his honor decrease if it was discovered, or hinted at? Does it make a difference if he's perceived as the receiver (putting him in a more "womanish" role) instead of the giver? Is it drastic enough to strip him of his knighthood or force him into exile?

Lastly, related to the entire situation with Sir Magarin: he stormed into her family's manor (she's currently married to a different knight, so wasn't there at the time) and demanded a duel with her cousin, who had fathered a child on Magarin's wife. Bledoc accepted, but lost. Sir Tyrelaine, the ruling knight of the manor and also cousins with Bledoc, tried to step in toward the end to beg for Bledoc's life, but botched her Family Passion roll and went howling off into the wilderness. Magarin ended up killing Bledoc.

What I'm still unsure on is the legality and probable perception by the rest of the nobility of all of this. I gather at the time (especially in the Uther era) it was perfectly legal to kill one's wife and her lover for adultery, even if it was frowned upon. What if it was in another knight's manor -- it violates Hospitality when unprovoked, but does it do so under those circumstances, and when the challenged knight accepts the duel? (They stayed inside and dueled in the main hall because there was a howling snowstorm outside.) What effect does the madness of the knight of the manor have upon it? I have plans to have her return and denounce Magarin, but I'm not sure what she would see as honorable or legal, and how much that would conflict with her natural inclination to take revenge upon her cousin's killer. Is it something that would even be brought before Earl Roderick, given as the death took place in a duel, or is it a private matter? I've kind of half-mucked about with possible results, but I'm not entirely satisfied, given my uncertainty on the issue.

Any light you can shed on these matters would be appreciated. :D

Strictly speaking, "Old English" would be the Germanic tongue spoken by the Angles, Saxons and Jutes (the Frisians too, most likely). The only written languages likely used in Dark Ages Britain are Latin and Greek, and the latter was used primarily for keeping financial accounts. Ogham and Glyphs are not writing systems per se, but sets of symbols which can be used to pass along specific sorts of information. Messages are primarily passed along orally.

On the topic of homosexuality, I refer you to Paul Halsall's The Experience Of Homosexuality In The Middle Ages (http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/gaymidages.html), William A. Percy's Homosexuality In The Middle Ages (http://www.williamapercy.com/wiki/index.php/Homosexuality_in_the_Middle_Ages), and Kat Sanders' Homosexuality In The Late Middle Ages And The Renaissance (http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/978412/homosexuality_in_the_late_middle_ages.html?cat=37) . Those articles should give you a decent overview. For a summary which may not reflect current scholarship, you might also want to take a gander at David Morton's Sex In The Middle Ages: 10 Titillating Facts You Wanted To Know But Were Afraid to Ask (http://www.oddee.com/item_96646.aspx). I would personally rule that the Roman Church and the Wotanic Pagans condemn it, the British Church frowns upon it, and the British Pagans are indifferent.

As for the legality of killing one's wife and her lover, most people would likely consider a cuckold within his rights to do so. It's a matter of Honor. If he challenged and fought the lover, the lover's defeat would be seen as evidence of the cuckold's rightness and he is under no obligation to show mercy to a downed foe. It would only violate Hospitality if he concealed his violent intent upon arrival at the other knight's manor. You can ride up and call another knight out, enter his hall and drag him outside, or even murder him in his bed as long as you made it plain that you were there to kill the man. If he's unarmed there will be a loss of Honor, but that's it.

Hello! New here, though I've lurked for a bit and combed through older topics to soak in Pendragoniness. :) I've been playing through GPC on a solo campaign using Mythic GME, and three questions have been bugging me on and off -- I've done some basic internet-research on it, but come up with nothing definitive.

Just remember, Greg always likes separate questions per thread.


On literacy: Is there also any reading/writing in ... I'm assuming Old English? Though admittedly questions of language aren't particularly important in Pendragon, given the tradition -- but if there's a separate writing system for Latin/Ogham/Runic/etc., does one exist for the lay tongue? Or does a system for writing Old English/lay tongue simply not exist yet, and any writing is only going to be in the aforementioned scripts?

Normally, only the aforementioned scripts.
Once afield, you can run into Greek, etc.


If that is the case, how are messages passed? Oral reports via messengers,

Yep, especially if: they come form an illiterate culture; if it secret too important to write down; on the battle field, and so on


or dictating the letter to a scribe if the recipient can read/also has a scribe to read it aloud? (I've basically been treating it as mostly the former, as I suspect that would be cheaper and easier than hunting down a scribe or a monk.)

All scribes of he period are monks
Nonsense, but monks are the normal person for this
they need not be pious, and in the lower orders are not required to stay in the order


On homosexuality: Thanks to the way Mythic works, I discovered recently that one of the NPC knights is gay. Given as said NPC (Sir Magarin) is currently the target for a smear campaign by a particularly unscrupulous lady (he killed her cousin Sir Bledoc), if she finds out, she will gleefully out him. I'm pretty certain that, while homosociality and male bonding is held in high regard, homosexual acts are heavily frowned upon. Just a guess. :)

Condemned by Christianity, ok if you're a top in Germanic, no one cares in KAP Paganism.


But what kind of effects would it have on his status? Would his honor decrease if it was discovered, or hinted at?

Honor, no, not a bit
status, probably not by law, but the church makes noise about this stuff so they can conceal what's going on in some of the monasteries


Does it make a difference if he's perceived as the receiver (putting him in a more "womanish" role) instead of the giver? Is it drastic enough to strip him of his knighthood or force him into exile?

Nah, not a chance

Undead Trout gave good sources to look at. Here is a simpler one: read about the 2 public lovers of K Edward II
Sir Piers Gaveston was an exiled nobleman, and in every way a "knight's knight," handsome and buff and jovial and a master at tournaments, went out drinking with the other knights, etc. We know that at this time the court was playing a lot at being Arthurian, and I'll bet he would have been a master at Courtly romance too. Who better for a chaste relationship?
He was thrown out for being too greedy, over stepping his station, and ticking off all the noblemen. He was defeated in battle and executed.
Hugh the Dispenser was a lower class idiot who must have missed the Gaveston program, because he did the same thing, but was apparently more slimy and insulting. When the lords revolted, the king did the only courageous and successful thing in his life and defeated them, executing 28 knights and nobles afterward, and exiling many more.
Edward and Hugh ruled until his son and ex-wife came from France and defeated him.
Incidentally, for all the ink spilled on minutiae I've seen very little that addresses the issue of who likely was the father of King Edward III.


Lastly, related to the entire situation with Sir Magarin: he stormed into her family's manor (she's currently married to a different knight, so wasn't there at the time) and demanded a duel with her cousin, who had fathered a child on Magarin's wife. Bledoc accepted, but lost. Sir Tyrelaine, the ruling knight of the manor and also cousins with Bledoc, tried to step in toward the end to beg for Bledoc's life, but botched her Family Passion roll and went howling off into the wilderness. Magarin ended up killing Bledoc.

What I'm still unsure on is the legality and probable perception by the rest of the nobility of all of this. I gather at the time (especially in the Uther era) it was perfectly legal to kill one's wife and her lover for adultery, even if it was frowned upon.

Yea, crime of passion
hope there is some proof if relatives push for it


What if it was in another knight's manor -- it violates Hospitality when unprovoked, but does it do so under those circumstances,

Yes


and when the challenged knight accepts the duel?

In his hall? Stupid knight, but probably that made it OK to kill him there


(They stayed inside and dueled in the main hall because there was a howling snowstorm outside.)

Pussies


What effect does the madness of the knight of the manor have upon it? I have plans to have her return and denounce Magarin, but I'm not sure what she would see as honorable or legal, and how much that would conflict with her natural inclination to take revenge upon her cousin's killer. Is it something that would even be brought before Earl Roderick, given as the death took place in a duel, or is it a private matter? I've kind of half-mucked about with possible results, but I'm not entirely satisfied, given my uncertainty on the issue.

Accepting the dual makes the killing legal
I think the earl would dismiss her claims and take the manor into his care until things are sorted out. In 4-10 years maybe. He's a busy man.

Just remember, Greg always likes separate questions per thread.


Aha, I'll keep that in mind! Thought it would be nicer to consolidate things in one post rather than have three separate ones in a row, but now I know.

Thanks for the sources and clarifications on my questions! Some of the links made it sound as though a big reason (if not the only one) King Edward and his lovers were killed was because of suspicions of homosexuality. Reading some more into it, it seemed as much to do with his excessive favoritism and lack of political savvy when running roughshod over other lords. I'm going to guess that would be less of a concern for a lower-ranking knight, since they frankly don't have as much political sway and thus excessive favoritism wouldn't disrupt things much (as long as they fathered heirs).

A couple of final notes



(as long as they fathered heirs).


"they" works well too, if discreet

A gay husband is EXACTLY what a Romantic Lady wants
A gay courtier is the perfect candidate to rack up Romance points with significantly less trouble than a het

The only overtly gay character I've found in traditional literature is burnt to a crisp when he sits on the Siege Perilous. The writer says it was due to his sexuality, but those monk authors often had serious issues of their own. Did he forget that the Perilous Seat destroys anyone who wrongly sits in it?

I've long thought that Dodinas le Sauvage and Sagramore le Desirous could be gay, mostly because they are virtually never without the other. And I cannot get past the image of a clever and sly monk slipping in a reference to the wild, desirous couple that includes the Greek knight.

Heterosexual male bonding is a natural theme in the macho knightly world, obligatory for survival in fact. Sexuality isn't really a part of it, until the monks dip their oar in. Evidence seems to indicate that more primitive, pre-Monotheist cultures didn't care if a pair was homosexual (the original pair of Hearty Saxon Warlords seem to be one such, their names literally mean "Horse" and "Mare"). Read the articles, and go read about supermacho Huey Long's sexual activity.

I'm confident that most knights were thugs with more damage bonus than INT, and when Sir Glory 7000 addresses them or is in hearing distance, they are polite and deferential, then revert to the usual baboon jokery when he leaves, while one out of seven of them drowns himself in his cups. It seems to be a fact through history that the cultures in which survival is not the all-time issue, public sentiment for all minorities gets liberal. In KAP such an attitude lives in the lush, liberal lands of Occitainia and Zazamac.

In fact, interpreting this data "correctly" is about us, not the men of the data. You, Autumnflame, are playing solo, so there's no question of congruence between the GM and the players. If homosexuality comes up in the game, and this congruence is not certain, then the GM and players need to stop the game, have a discussion to find common ground, then play again. If no common ground is found, friction will follow.

"I don't really care" is sufficient common ground, as it is often followed "let's just play the damn game."

Which is the point. PLAY = fun, GAME = relaxation activity

Just remember, Greg always likes separate questions per thread.

Aha, I'll keep that in mind! Thought it would be nicer to consolidate things in one post rather than have three separate ones in a row, but now I know.


It's an arbitrary point, I agree.
No chastising here, I just want to make things as easy as possible for this lazy ol' man. :)

No chastising here, I just want to make things as easy as possible for this lazy ol' man. :)

Single questions per thread are also handy to people who later may have the same question, and go searching for it. As are good forum threat titles, a little peeve of mine. (This thread has a pretty good title, despite having multiple questions.)