Other than as a bit of colour, APP doesn't really do much for my group. I'm starting to see some really ugly PK's and I have dreamt up an easy system to link the Distinctive Features to penalties.

Here we go.

1. Where a PK has a negative number of Distinctive Features per table on Chargen he takes a cumulative penalty of -5 (ie 3 feature is -15 penalty) to social skills including, flirt, courtesy, intrigue, sing, orate, etc.
2. The Glory Bonus can buy off a penalty. So an ugly PK (APP5) with over 3,000 glory will have no penalties. This simulates that renown will be more important than APP and encourage the gaining of Glory.
3. [Optional] Where a PK has a positive number of Distinctive Features, they get a +5 in social situations for each one. Same principle as 2.

Now I feel that 2. would work quite well but not too happy with 3. However, it would be fun to have a super charismatic Pk every now and then.

Another thought I considered was to link the number of sistinctive features to Virtues and Vices. In the spirit of the old films, ugly people are villains and hero's are good cliche, I was thinking to do away with the Traits requirement that 1 Famous Trait starts at 16 and instead link it to the number of Distinctive Features.

So handsome Knights (APP17) would have 3 Virtues at 16 and ugly Knights (APP5) would have 3 vices at 16.

What are peoples thoughts?

Unbalanced? Too powerful?

I'd really like to hear how people use APP in their games and how it affects social skills.

I'd really like to hear how people use APP in their games and how it affects social skills.


I think that the main problem with applying modifiers to skills, it that it can quickly become unbalancing; +5 is after all a hefty modifier, and might lead to a lot of APP 13 characters ("just to get the bonus").

At the moment I use an APP-roll as an prerequisite for some social action. "Want to Flirt? Roll APP! Want to Dance? Roll APP. Want to talk with Gawaine at the Great Camelot Party? Roll APP! Want to be one of the twenty knights that can take part in this years pageantry at the Pentecoast Tournament? Well you are rich and famous, but they don't want any boorish knights out there - roll APP!" This has the benefit of being rather linear (APP 11 is better than APP 10; there are no sudden breaks or hefty jumps), and it also means that a really low APP makes social skills virtually useless, while knights who want to be social also need to invest in APP.

I am sure that there are myriads of objections to this, but in the final analysis - it works. Low APP characters have become rare birds and are severely handicapped in social settings, and players who invest in APP get a solid in-game benefit (more skill checks and glory plus social opportunity).

APP is not easy to pin down purely in game terms. It doesn't have the same black and white benefits as say CON or SIZ. My players believe APP to be important, probably more so than it actually is, and that certainly helps. For example, none of my PKs have boosted SIZ due to the -1 APP penalty.

I'm using APP in a similar way to Skarpskytten, as the prime stat for courtly interaction, boosted by glory, Fashion & jewelry. If a PK wants to speak with a lady then it's an opposed APP roll (his vs hers) to see if he grabs her attention away from any other knight(s) present. This makes attractive women harder to woo but that suits me fine and gives APP meaning, without requiring much else in the way of rules.

Also, you can give Glory for high APP characters in the same way as Passions & Traits (ie 16+ earns that much Glory). I extend this benefit to the PK's wife too; if she looks good she earns him Glory. It's a minor thing but it all adds up.

Thanks guys. Simple. There are not that many APP rolls in my game, but I'll use them as you suggest.

Cheers

By the way, any thoughts on my second option and tying APP to Traits? I'm now thinking of an alternative where hitting 16 in a trait will grant a +/-1 to APP depending on whether its a virtue or a vice. I will cap this at 3 in line with the Distinctive Features. My reasoning is that nice people are more appealing and mean people are not.

Thanks for your comments.

I'm using APP in a similar way to Skarpskytten, as the prime stat for courtly interaction, boosted by glory, Fashion & jewelry.


This is an really interesting option. I really don't like the Glory bonus to skills, because it quickly becomes unbalancing for high Glory Knights. I would rather add Glory to APP: High Glory knights are considered more interesting, but don't get any bonuses to skills. A pity I only have three years left to play ...



By the way, any thoughts on my second option and tying APP to Traits? I'm now thinking of an alternative where hitting 16 in a trait will grant a +/-1 to APP depending on whether its a virtue or a vice. I will cap this at 3 in line with the Distinctive Features. My reasoning is that nice people are more appealing and mean people are not.

It would only apply for new characters?

In a High Fantasy Pendragon Campaign it might work. But I run a more gritty version. And I love T H Whites take on Lancelot (he has APP 6, or something like that).

Ideas what I have seen:

Starting Knight has Armour with APs equal to their APP score (since attractive, fashionable knights have attractive fashionable armour) if play begins in an era with limited armour availability then knights will have multiple suits.

Starting Knight has 2 Courtly skills which start at the same level as his APP score.

Knights with positive distinctive features (only) have free experience checks equal to their positive distinctive features (as other people clamour to teach and tell them things during the winter phase)

A list of suggestions posted a few years ago by Greg Stafford himself, on a similar discussion:



Here are some uses that I have acquired through testing and use. Comments are welcome, as always.
for there will surely be some controversy here!!

APP
Appearance is one’s exterior look, being visual and thus entirely outward and superficial. Appearance provokes deep responses in human beings, automatic and normally outside of our awareness, never mind being within our control. (Exceptions exist, but not among knights.)
APP Interpretation
01-05. Ugly. See below
06-09. Plain, unattractive, flawed
10-15. Handsome, pretty
16-20. Superlative; beautiful (women) or spectacular (men); gorgeous, dazzling. See below

Appearance is only useful when it can be seen. It has no affect when men are clad in concealing armor.

Superlative Appearance
Gorgeousness has its advantages, and disadvantages.
In a crowd of equals, the most handsome person will be addressed first, as if he or she is the leader (since handsome people have Honor, the most handsome is the most honorable!).
Everyone is always watching, especially when the beautiful person is not watching. Thus it is very difficult for them to do anything in secret, including whispering at a feast, speaking to anyone, and even how long is spent with him, or her, or that group over there.

Appearance Bonus
Each superlative APP point (16+)grants a +1 bonus to the following:
Flirt: Natural attraction makes it easier to Flirt.
Intrigue: The handsome fellow, giving even just a little bit of unusual attention to the staff, gets information much easier than usual.
Orate, Singing, Play, Dancing: People prefer to be entertained by pretty people, because even if the performance is not as good, at least they had a pleasant evening observing the attractive performer.

It does not affect Romance.

Ugly Appearance
Ugliness carries a taint with it. Commoners lack Honor, and are thus less appealing to the noble eye.
OPPOSITE OF ABOVE--text not complete
Ugliness has its advantages and disadvantages.
In a crowd of equals, the ugliest person will not be addressed. At all if possible.
If something goes wrong, the ugliest person is always blamed first.
Nobody looks at you. In a crowd you are practically invisible, able to stand nearby to whisperers, or in a room perhaps entirely unseen, as if you are one of the servants.

Honor
All heroic characters are handsome, and all their ladies are beautiful. Being ugly is a terrible disadvantage since people immediately judge a person on his superficial traits. Thus, at character generation, each point of APP below 10 costs 1 Honor. Losing APP due to major wounds or aging does not diminish Honor, however. Scars from wounds are a note of courage and strength, and counteract the loss. Likewise, aging adds to honor in exact proportion to losses.

Nice summary, Stranger.
Back to the OP:



Other than as a bit of colour, APP doesn't really do much for my group. I'm starting to see some really ugly PK's and I have dreamt up an easy system to link the Distinctive Features to penalties.


Are you using random rolls for stats, or the point-design system? I find that in the point system, players often end up with aPP below 10 to get extra points to spend on te stats useful in combat.
One simple fix: give players 50 points to spend on stats (rather than 60), and roll APP on 3d6.
The beautry of this approach is, since you are decoupling APP entirely from the rest of the stats, you can change the roll to whatever you want without it affecting anything else (except, in the long term, a very minor effect on aging rolls). For instance, if you want a campaign biased to producing handsome knights, you could roll 2d6+6.

Alternatively, just use random rolls for all the stats.

Nice summary, Stranger.
Back to the OP:



Other than as a bit of colour, APP doesn't really do much for my group. I'm starting to see some really ugly PK's and I have dreamt up an easy system to link the Distinctive Features to penalties.


Are you using random rolls for stats, or the point-design system? I find that in the point system, players often end up with aPP below 10 to get extra points to spend on te stats useful in combat.
One simple fix: give players 50 points to spend on stats (rather than 60), and roll APP on 3d6.
The beautry of this approach is, since you are decoupling APP entirely from the rest of the stats, you can change the roll to whatever you want without it affecting anything else (except, in the long term, a very minor effect on aging rolls). For instance, if you want a campaign biased to producing handsome knights, you could roll 2d6+6.

Alternatively, just use random rolls for all the stats.


Yes, we're doing point buy at present. My players are not adverse to random, so we may just go with that, although just rolling APP randomly might also work.

And now for something completely different:

I played in a Illiad-Pendragon game at the weekend and the GM made App= average of all of the other characteristics.

Which fitted in with in with imposing, attractive Chieftains, Kings and Gods being the real DHBs.

Some NPCs had a HIGHER APP than that (to make them seem scarier and more heroic than they actually were!) but neither that option nor trading down availible to PCs.

I liked it.

Very interesting.

And now for something completely different:

I played in a Illiad-Pendragon game at the weekend and the GM made App= average of all of the other characteristics.


Cool
Was that by one of the authors who just submitted their Bronze Age game?

And now for something completely different:

I played in a Illiad-Pendragon game at the weekend and the GM made App= average of all of the other characteristics.

Which fitted in with in with imposing, attractive Chieftains, Kings and Gods being the real DHBs.

Some NPCs had a HIGHER APP than that (to make them seem scarier and more heroic than they actually were!) but neither that option nor trading down availible to PCs.

I liked it.


I've had a thought over Christmas and think I have what I wanted. In the GPC, in the Forest Sauvage chapter I think, there is a Devil Rider. Pretty much invincible. Anyway, he looks at how evil the PK's are. Evil defined by their scores in Selfish, etc. Can't remember the exact traits right now but they are in the book. Greg recomends totting them up.

I think, I will look at the scores of the 'good' traits and make APP the average of them all.

This means that APP will be dynamic and in the spirit of heroic fiction, the good guys are better looking than the bad guys.

It would be quite possible for someone created ugly, will slowly become better looking (or more precisely, more socially acceptable) the more good they do. Similarly, goodlooking knights who do evil will slowly deteriorate as they are shunned.

So how about this?

Why not something simpler, building off of things already present in the system? A high or low APP will give you a certain number of notable features; perhaps a +1/-1 bonus to social skills for each feature?

Why not something simpler, building off of things already present in the system? A high or low APP will give you a certain number of notable features; perhaps a +1/-1 bonus to social skills for each feature?


I started off with this thinking, but thought a +1/-1 was too small and bumped it up to +5/-5 per feature.

Isn't that too big, though? 14 APP gets you +10 to all such rolls; that's pretty big, and not that much of an investment. But you're right, +3 for 17 App does seem a bit weak.

I think, I will look at the scores of the 'good' traits and make APP the average of them all.

This means that APP will be dynamic and in the spirit of heroic fiction, the good guys are better looking than the bad guys.

It would be quite possible for someone created ugly, will slowly become better looking (or more precisely, more socially acceptable) the more good they do. Similarly, goodlooking knights who do evil will slowly deteriorate as they are shunned.

So how about this?


This is clever, i like it.

It doesn't answer the question of what to do to make APP useful or valuable, but it sounds like a great way of determining the score.

I'm not sure about straight averaging though. There are 5 or 6 traits involved; an average may lead to not much variation. Though if each single point of APP makes a minor but noticeable difference, that would work fine.

The good Traits are;

Forgiving
Generous
Honest
Merciful
Trusting

Rather than taking an average of all 5, I'd just take an average of the highest and the lowest.

I'll go with a +1/-1 modifier to social skills based on distinctive features.

I agree (in current form) high APP must give some benefit else its a dump stat.
Or take it away from character creation and 'derive' it from some other stats and leave it as useless as it is.

fg,
Thijs

I agree (in current form) high APP must give some benefit else its a dump stat.
Or take it away from character creation and 'derive' it from some other stats and leave it as useless as it is.


I think someone on this forum suggested that you would by the four "hard" stats and just roll 3d6 for APP. One of my players suggester to remove it from the game, and just letting players decide how fair or foul their PKs look.

We use 50 stat points and 3d6 APP. Seems to work OK, but APP is still very much unused stat.

Thanks to the various house rules people have been posting about APP and Glory, I started thinking about how to fix things myself... The two 'problems' that I see with those are:
1. High Glory swamps the courtly skills.
2. APP doesn't seem to do much at all. I.e. it is all up to what the GM says.

Here is one idea... Reduce the Glory skill bonus to courtly skills, and add a bonus/penalty based on APP.
For instance:
1. The new Glory skill bonus is
Glory Bonus Example
2000 +1 Proven knights
4000 +2 Locally famous knights
8000 +3 Famous knights
12000 +4 RTKs
16000 +5 Famous RTKs
20000 +6 Lamorak
30000 +7
40000 +8 Gawaine
60000 +9 Lancelot
100000 +10 Arthur
(Glory/4000 round down +1 up to 20000, +1 for 2000.)

2. APP modifier for Courtly Skills is (APP-11)/2, rounded up. So:
APP Modifier
3 -4
4-5 -3
6-7 -2
8-9 -1
10-11 0
12-13 +1
14-15 +2
16-17 +3
18-19 +4
20-21 +5
22-23 +6
24 +7

So how would this play play out... Well, a starting Glory 1000 courtly knight, say Flirting 10 and App 14, would have Flirting 10+2 = 12. A famous combat knight, with Glory 8000, App 7 and Flirting 4 would have only Flirting 3+3-2=4 under this system. This compared to 11 and 11 assuming full glory bonus.

APP modifier for Courtly Skills is (APP-11)/2, rounded up. So:
APP Modifier
3 -4
4-5 -3
6-7 -2
8-9 -1
10-11 0
12-13 +1
14-15 +2
16-17 +3
18-19 +4
20-21 +5
22-23 +6
24 +7

Ah, the good ol' D&D 3.X stat bonus model! :-)

I think this is a really good way to work it. I have been pondering something similar when one player turned up with her second character - a Frank who, through Luck rolls, achieved an APP of 18. I wanted to give a bonus of some size but not game-breakingly so I went with a +4 to a Flirting check.

Here's another thought, which is a modification of one in above.

Courtly APP: Physical APP + 1 / 2000 Glory.
Courtly Skill Bonus: (APP-10)/2, rounded down, capped at +20 (i.e. Courtly APP 40).

Not sure it is simpler, but it does award the player more often, as APP 13 character will reach Courtly APP 14 at Glory 2000, whereas APP 12 needs Glory 4000. Each APP is hence valuable, rather than creating plateaus where one point more does not matter in the slightest.

As I've experienced it in play, APP is not by any means a dump stat.

It's been a major determining factor in which knight gets the lions share of attention from women, and is just now revealing its true teeth as aging starts to kick in, on top of major wound stat decreases.

Characters with a very low APP are going to die earlier than others. (If you don't get killed off in combat)

There are not many of our PCs with particularly High APP, but if you are playing for the long haul, you can't skimp on it.

I use Greg's suggestion that "famous" Appearance (that is, 16+) grants a bonus to some skills. Works nice.

Remember that around 30 APP is when you start making people get Amor (You) passions without their consent.

Normally this wouldn't be a problem, but I ran a campaign a few years ago that had an interesting turn.

I should start out saying that I was running an, "only male knights," are socially acknowledged campaign. Meaning that if the women in the group wanted to be knights (one did), then they could either play a male character or be a cross-dressing female knight that would have to keep her identity secret. So of course she wanted to play the secret identity game.

The campaign started with the player squires getting knighted by Arthur at the Battle of Badon Hill in an emergency combat group ceremony... thing. The Irish female squire just happened to be in the group that he knighted.

She ended up being a long term character, and after a few months of playing when all the other knights had started getting super high combat attributes, she ended up with a 28 APP. I shudder to think about what kind of courtly skills she would have had if I had given a bonus to them from her high APP.

The game didn't go on for much longer than that, but her super high APP was starting to have an... interesting effect on her at court. Morgan le Fay had her in her sights, Guenevere was starting to get jealous, Gawaine even proposed to her (and eventually won her over).

Just my $0.02. Appearance can be just as game breaking, if not more so, than other stats.

Cool
Was that by one of the authors who just submitted their Bronze Age game?


Not my fastest response to a question ever (what's a year between friends?)

No. I don't believe so. If they have they've kept it very quiet this end!

And now for something completely different:

I played in a Illiad-Pendragon game at the weekend and the GM made App= average of all of the other characteristics.

Which fitted in with in with imposing, attractive Chieftains, Kings and Gods being the real DHBs.

Some NPCs had a HIGHER APP than that (to make them seem scarier and more heroic than they actually were!) but neither that option nor trading down availible to PCs.

I liked it.


I've had a thought over Christmas and think I have what I wanted. In the GPC, in the Forest Sauvage chapter I think, there is a Devil Rider. Pretty much invincible. Anyway, he looks at how evil the PK's are. Evil defined by their scores in Selfish, etc. Can't remember the exact traits right now but they are in the book. Greg recomends totting them up.

I think, I will look at the scores of the 'good' traits and make APP the average of them all.

This means that APP will be dynamic and in the spirit of heroic fiction, the good guys are better looking than the bad guys.

It would be quite possible for someone created ugly, will slowly become better looking (or more precisely, more socially acceptable) the more good they do. Similarly, goodlooking knights who do evil will slowly deteriorate as they are shunned.

So how about this?


I like the sound of that, how about changing APP to APP though? (Appearance to Appeal) has no other game effect other than to (imo) better fit the dynamic approach.

Take care Dalfort

Looking back at the literature, I'm struck by how often good looks are taken to be a manifestation of inner virtue, and, in the world of romance, this is proven to be true. Perhaps when adding up the trait totals for the Chivalry bonus, a knight could replace one trait with his APP score? Or maybe he would add +1 to the sum of the relevant traits for each notable feature he has (so +1 from 10-12, +2 from 13-16, and +3 at 17+)? Something like that.

Making Chivalry easier to attain for this sort of character would be helpful, especially now that Greg Stafford wants to raise the threshold from a sum of 80 to 96; it is no longer so easy for a newly-made knight to be Chivalrous and get the +3 armor bonus. However, maybe a new-made 21-year-old knight could do so, with a sufficiently high APP. It wouldn't be overpowered, certainly; a combat-focused character would still have much more to gain from investing in stats other than APP, especially given the difficulty of raising those stats (and especially the all-powerful SIZ stat). A high APP character would now be more able to survive the early years, when his low skill values make fights more dangerous. At the same time, that 100 annual glory would likewise help compensate for investing in APP rather than other stats.