I'm getting ready to run my first game of KAP (I've never played or ran it prior to now). I've asked a bunch of questions over at the Yahoo Group and they've been great over there. Someone suggested I stop by here to gather info as well. So with that, I have a couple questions:

1. I'm playing v5, so the players will receive a starting Manor once they are knighted. How should I handle the 6-8L per year they are earning? Do I need to do a precise accounting for it, or is it just "assumed" that they have enough money on hand to handle routine things? For example, if I want to buy a couple extra Lances do I have to tally up the cost and reduce it from the 6-8L per year of income or is it just assumed that as long as I'm not impoverished or poor I can stock my PK with routine items like this?

2. How richly are PK's typically rewarded with plunder? I know some years you will fight in wars and therefore probably not earn any plunder. So in the years where you "adventure," what is a reasonable guideline for how much loot to award?

3. I asked this earlier, but I wanted to try from a different angle. How rare should magic items be in this game? If you have an Extraordinary Knight with 10,000 Glory, is it reasonable that they might have a couple magic items that they have gone on adventures for? Or is magic so rare that even the mightiest of Knights typically will NEVER own a magic item?

4. Since I'm starting off in 485, and this is a time of "Might makes right," should the players focus their traits on things that support that style of play (ignoring things like Just, Merciful, etc)? And if this happens, will they then be handicapped once the chivalrous age is underway?

5. Along that same line, do you think it's being overly generous to my new players if I allow them a Chivalry bonus (assuming they have the 80 points to qualify) immediately, even though it shouldn't normally kick in until a later period? I just wanted to give their beginning PK's a little better chance of survival.

Thanks,
George

I'm getting ready to run my first game of KAP (I've never played or ran it prior to now). I've asked a bunch of questions over at the Yahoo Group and they've been great over there. Someone suggested I stop by here to gather info as well. So with that, I have a couple questions:

1. I'm playing v5, so the players will receive a starting Manor once they are knighted. How should I handle the 6-8L per year they are earning? Do I need to do a precise accounting for it, or is it just "assumed" that they have enough money on hand to handle routine things? For example, if I want to buy a couple extra Lances do I have to tally up the cost and reduce it from the 6-8L per year of income or is it just assumed that as long as I'm not impoverished or poor I can stock my PK with routine items like this?

2. How richly are PK's typically rewarded with plunder? I know some years you will fight in wars and therefore probably not earn any plunder. So in the years where you "adventure," what is a reasonable guideline for how much loot to award?

3. I asked this earlier, but I wanted to try from a different angle. How rare should magic items be in this game? If you have an Extraordinary Knight with 10,000 Glory, is it reasonable that they might have a couple magic items that they have gone on adventures for? Or is magic so rare that even the mightiest of Knights typically will NEVER own a magic item?

4. Since I'm starting off in 485, and this is a time of "Might makes right," should the players focus their traits on things that support that style of play (ignoring things like Just, Merciful, etc)? And if this happens, will they then be handicapped once the chivalrous age is underway?

5. Along that same line, do you think it's being overly generous to my new players if I allow them a Chivalry bonus (assuming they have the 80 points to qualify) immediately, even though it shouldn't normally kick in until a later period? I just wanted to give their beginning PK's a little better chance of survival.

Thanks,
George


1. The money from the manor goes towards the knight's maintenance so it is mostly invisible wealth the knight never really has in his pocket. Any surplus over the maintenance required becomes treasure to be spent or kept. The Book of the Manor has expanded rules for running manors but for a first game it might be best to stick to the basic system for a few years of play. If your group then fancies delving into the land administration side then it could be worth picking up. The maintenance level should cover replacing the basic wargear (though probably not armour or extra warhorses). I wouldn't crunch numbers for a few lances unless the knight is truly impoverished.

2. Wars generally reward player knights with plunder moreso than adventures. After a victorious battle, ransoms, looted wargear and the stormed enemy camp can provide rich pickings. The loot is included in scripted battles in the GPC and also described in the basic battle system and the one in the Book of Battle. Some adventures allow for loot, plunder or rewards but it can be very variable. For landed knights their upkeep is provided by their manor so any loot they acquire is disposable income. There is really no minimum amount that the GM should provide. In the Uther and Anarchy periods linking easy money to negative trait checks seems appropriate. Doing the right thing may mean turning down some lucrative propositions.

3. It is perfectly possible to never own a magic item. Many magic items in the Book of Knights and ladies have a built in destruction or obsolescence. Using those can limit the chance of putting too many into a game. The magic item should be part of the story and never just a piece of gear IMO.

4. I suppose you could play that either way. If you are having sons inherit traits from their father than running the son of a murderous anarchy phase robber-knight and warlord arriving at court in Camelot and trying to adapt could be an interesting story. In the GPC game I'm running at the moment the player knights have attempted to act with chivalry since the adventure of sword lake.

5. I allowed the chivalry bonus early on. It encourages heroic, sometimes unpopular and unprofitable behaviour in the early phase and can set the player knights apart if they want to take that route.

Best of luck.

I think Sir Morningkiller (strangley named after a NPC in my late campaign, though I have never met him :P) gave a very good answer. Just a few notes.

4 and 5. I think players should be free to focus their traits as they want - and take the consequences. I actually didn't allow the bonus until the mid 510s, I thats what I really would recommend. (If your concerned about PK survival, just runner fewer combats instead). If you don't agree, well, it should be very hard to be chivalric in the harsh and cruel Uther and Anarchy period. Okay, so your Chivalric, and now your Lord orders you and your fellow knights to sack and slaughter a town - what do you do? Being Chivalric in this age should lead to problems every gaming session. Otherwise you trivializes it - and makes the contrast with the latter periods to small.

One of the points with the different eras of course are that the scarred veterans of the early day should struggle with Arthurs newfangled concepts. This opens up for great roleplaying - i.e. PKs that are opposed to Chivalry or who struggles with the traits they accumulated during the Anarchy era to become Chivalric. Again, I think that allowing Chivalry early on decreases the difference between the periods, which I think is a bad thing. The game is more fun if the eras are very different, not only in content (what PKs typically do), but also in ethos.

Thanks Gentlemen! So Sharpskytten, is that image from Fistful of Dollars or the Good the Bad and the Ugly? Coincidentally, I just happened to watch the original Dirty Harry last night. Hadn't seen it for years. Fun movie. :)

Anyway, back on topic. The responses are very thorough and helpful, so I'm down to just a couple of clarifying points:

1. To run battles, is everything I need included in the 5th ed core book (Appendix 4)? Or do I need to buy Book of Battles?

2. If a battle in the GPC doesn't specifically list Plunder, then you don't get any - right? For example, the Battle of Mearcred Creek in 485 doesn't show any plunder - whereas the Battle of Lindsey in 490 does list plunder.

3. If the whim strikes me, I may get the book of Knights/Ladies for more info on magic items.

4. Interesting points of view on chivalry. I need to decide whether to allow it early on (against rules as written). Appreciate the advice from both of you!

Thanks.

Thanks Gentlemen! So Sharpskytten, is that image from Fistful of Dollars or the Good the Bad and the Ugly? Coincidentally, I just happened to watch the original Dirty Harry last night. Hadn't seen it for years. Fun movie. :)

Yep, I think that. My name means "The Sharpshooter", so the picture fits the name ... or not ...


1. To run battles, is everything I need included in the 5th ed core book (Appendix 4)? Or do I need to buy Book of Battles?

All you need is in the book. The system in the book, alas is not very good. The BoB is better, but has an errata as long as the devils tail. It's a though choice, really. Or you could just run narrative battles, if you dare :D


2. If a battle in the GPC doesn't specifically list Plunder, then you don't get any - right? For example, the Battle of Mearcred Creek in 485 doesn't show any plunder - whereas the Battle of Lindsey in 490 does list plunder.

I guess so. I don't really like the plunder in the PGC. The levels are better in BoB.


4. Interesting points of view on chivalry. I need to decide whether to allow it early on (against rules as written). Appreciate the advice from both of you!

I just want to underline that if you play one session per year (and most GMs don't manage that, me included, and I am rather hardcore on this point), the whole PGC is 86 sessions long. If you don't keep the eras different, you and your players will die of boredom long before you reach 565. Pendragon plays best if you play one session per year and if you try to keep the eras distinct.

On point 5. One option to consider is that the armour bonus is there all the time if you qualify, but the annual glory bonus doesn't kick in until Arthur makes it a thing.

Also there's an alternative trait array for the pre-Arthurian 'might makes right' ideal that can be used as a houserule:


TRUE KNIGHT
This benefit represents the ideals of King Uther and dark age knighthood, for the days before Chivalry. The true knight is brave (Valorous), even foolhardy (Reckless). He knows there is nothing more important than his good name (Proud), and avenges slights against it (Vengeful). The true knight upholds the practice of largesse (Generosity) and expects others to keep their word (Trusting). A true knight also knows that Might Makes Right (Arbitrary).

Traits: Need 80 points from Vengeful, Generous, Proud, Reckless, Trusting and Valorous. Since a strong knight makes his own rules, you can replace the lowest of these traits with your Arbitrary score.

Benefit: +1/5th Hit Points (round nearest)

Glory: 50 glory per year.

Chivalry: A True Knight cannot also be Chivalrous. When Chivalry becomes available, this ideal identifies you as an honourable-but-villainous knight, or a traditionalist who rejects King Arthurs new laws. Once a land (whether a kingdom or a manor) accepts Arthur's rule, this ideal vanishes from that land.

Regards
Luke

Yep, I think that. My name means "The Sharpshooter", so the picture fits the name ... or not ...

I always thought it had something to do with kittens. I still like my interpretation better.

I always thought it had something to do with kittens. I still like my interpretation better.


Why kittens? Kittens would be "kattungar". Pretty close, I guess. :P

silburnl: From whence is the True Knight? Is it your own work, or have I missed something?

Skarp's kitten, to be precise. Don't know who Skarp is, but I guess he's a cat person.

True Knight is, if I recall, a houserule from bigsteveuk here on the boards.

Thanks guys. Oddly enough, I was pondering something very similar to that houserule. I was going to use a set of traits similar to those pointed out by Luke, but I was going to just add +3 to Armor like with Chivalry. But the hit point modifier is pretty sweet too.

Anyway - if my PK's go this route, it sounds like they'll have a difficult adjustment period once Chivalry kicks in. Food for thought.

silburnl: From whence is the True Knight? Is it your own work, or have I missed something?


I lifted it from a post on rpg.net - the author there was BigSteveUK who disclaimed coming up with the idea, but didn't ID the originator.

Regards
Luke

Thanks everyone.

Also - this is all of our first time playing or running KAP. We're all LONG time D&D players, Gamma World, etc. So this game will be a definite change of pace, with more role playing, intrigue, chivalry, etc.

Do you have any advice as to when we should start the campaign?

Is it best to start in the rough-and-tumble 485 time frame?

Is it OK to start in the later, more chivalrous time?

Any advice on this?

Do you have any advice as to when we should start the campaign?

Is it best to start in the rough-and-tumble 485 time frame?

Is it OK to start in the later, more chivalrous time?

Any advice on this?


I would say, this is a matter of stamina.

If you actually think you and your group are able to last 80-100 game session, start in 485. It's a fantastic roleplaying experience to get though the whole campaign.

But if you think that might be a bit too much to chew off, start in 510 (when Arthur is crowned) or in 531 (when peace reigns, and chivalry and romance are well established) - because you will miss something if you don't reach this period. (Yes, the game is called King Arthur Pendragon, but it takes 25 standard game session before Arthur actually show up; this might frustrate some gaming groups).

Good points. Stamina could be an issue, especially because we rotate DM'ing duties. We each DM for 5-6 weeks and then the other DM in our group takes a turn. When he DM's, it will be D&D. When I DM, it will be KAP. So we'll maybe only get 20-25 sessions per year of KAP.

So at that rate, it would take us a year or two just to get to the high Arthurian times.

Another factor I want to point out is that I'm trying to SELL my group on KAP. I'd really like to make this a long-term campaign but it will never get off the ground unless it's interesting to start with. It sounds like later periods might be of more variety and general interest than the earlier periods. And I like the idea that they can build chivalrous knights.

I think I'm starting to gravitate towards a later start date.

I think I'll review the GPC and find a really interesting 5-10 year period with a variety of adventures - and use that as the starting point.

Also - would you use the Intro Scenario in v5 (the horse race, the joust, the hunt, etc) or just have the players knighted and dive right into one of the GPC adventures?

Thanks again.

I think I'll review the GPC and find a really interesting 5-10 year period with a variety of adventures - and use that as the starting point.

One thing that isn't immediately obvious about the GPC is that it alters pacing and tone as you go along, so for instance 485-495 is quite heavily scripted and foregrounds elements of the early story with the survivors ending up well placed to be county/duchy level movers-and-shakers, the anarchy is much more freeform and local in scale (PKs as biggish fish in a fairly small pond) then Arthur comes along at around the same time that the second generation achieves knighthood, the scale steps up a bit, PKs go back to being relatively small cogs in the bigger story etc etc

I guess that's an argument from me that the GPC is good to go from the very start...


Also - would you use the Intro Scenario in v5 (the horse race, the joust, the hunt, etc) or just have the players knighted and dive right into one of the GPC adventures?

I'd go for the intro and then in to the GPC personally - the first 10-year period is a set of trainer wheels for a group new to Pendragon.

Mind you I'm probably a bad example to follow - I've been running the same campaign, on and off, for about 15 years now and we're not out of the Anarchy yet...

Regards
Luke

Luke - thanks for the advice!

PS: In your game, it sounds like you're using the rule of thumb that "15 real life gamer years = 15 Arthurian years." ;)

Another newb question:

Let's say Knight A and Knight B are fighting with swords:
*Knight A = Sword skill of 15
*Knight B = Sword skill of 10

What happens if Knight A rolls a "12" and Knight B rolls a "10" (normally a Crit)? They have both made successful rolls, but Knight A should win since his roll is higher or should Knight B win since he rolled a Crit?

A crit always counts as a 20.

Thanks headwound! Now that you mention that, it does sound familiar. :)

I just had to jump in: the image that Skarpskytten is using is from "The Outlaw Josey Wales." I love the two Colt's Walker revolvers that he carries in that film!

I just had to jump in: the image that Skarpskytten is using is from "The Outlaw Josey Wales." I love the two Colt's Walker revolvers that he carries in that film!


Sounds like a must see :D

Next Question: My game starts Tuesday, and I'm a bit confused still about a player's free will to dictate his PK's actions vs. needing to make a trait roll.

One part of the rules indicates a player should be able to do as he wishes (more or less) if his trait is <16. But other parts of the book seem to indicate a roll is the best way to go if unsure. I'm confused.

So if a PK has an Honest 10/10 Deceitful, can he just state "Sir Blathergard lies to the gentleman?" Or is a roll required? If no roll is required and the PK does indeed tell the lie, then a Check would be added for Deceitful. Right?

What if the same situation applied, but the PK was Honest 15/5 Deceitful? Should he be required to roll against Deceitful in order to lie? If this is the case, he would only have a 25% chance of being able to tell the lie.

Am I interpreting this correctly? How do you handle it?

Generally, Traits in the range 5-15 = free choice, no roll needed, do whatever you want (and if the action was significant to the scenario, get a check).

Exceptions are Trait Challenges. If you get into a bragging match, drinking game etc, you need to roll to find a winner. Also, some adventure may challenge a certain Trait, requiring a roll for all PKs.

Awesome. Thanks Skarpskytten! That sounds a lot better than rolling for everything.

Next Question:
*The 5th Ed rulebook (page 115) states that armor applies a DEX modifier in "many situations, such as climbing and jumping." Does this DEX modifier also apply to Knockdown rolls? If so, anyone wearing Chainmail has a -10 DEX modifier and would therefore be Knocked Down the vast majority of the time he receives a heavy blow (unless he's super Dextrous).

Next Question:
*The 5th Ed rulebook (page 115) states that armor applies a DEX modifier in "many situations, such as climbing and jumping." Does this DEX modifier also apply to Knockdown rolls? If so, anyone wearing Chainmail has a -10 DEX modifier and would therefore be Knocked Down the vast majority of the time he receives a heavy blow (unless he's super Dextrous).


Page 79 (5.1 ed): "Encumbrance is not used to modify a DEX roll for balance". So, no, knights are not falling over like ninepins in combat. DEX 10 = 50% to make the Knockdown roll whatever armor is used.

Thanks! I'm glad you're on these boards to help out a newb. :)

Next Questions:

1. I could swear I read somewhere that a lance charge (successful or not) will shoot you past your target by some distance. Did I imagine this?

2. Space permitting (let's say they're on an open field with few opponents), can Knights attack every round with a lance charge? Or is that generally used more for the initial charge into melee and then they switch to a different weapon?

3. Can First Aid be applied to every wound? So if a PK receives 3 wounds in a vicious combat but manages to live, can all three wounds received First Aid attempts?

Thanks.

1. I didn't see it in the rulebook... there was a requirement for 6 yards of straight movement, and as a GM, I would expect some movement afterwards as well. Then again, we don't usually use 'tactical' movement as an exact thing, but more descriptive.

2. In Our Campaign, if there is a skirmish (say 4 PKs versus 4 NPKs) on an open field, should one knight wish to redo a lance charge after the first one (assuming he has his lance still - remember that it breaks on an odd damage roll), he needs to win an opposed Horsemanship roll with his opponent, if the opponent wishes to try and close with a melee weapon before the knight has time to build up to a charge. This, I think, is just our house rule, but it works nicely in my opinion. Note that while there is not enough time to charge if the knight loses the opposed Horsemanship roll, he still has enough time to drop his lance and grab his sword.

3. Yes, you are able to use First Aid on each wound ONCE. So if I get hit by 2 and 3 points, and you fail your First Aid in first and heal 2 points in second, I am left with 2 and 1 point wounds and those are then untreatable by First Aid. That by the way works even if the PK is dying (HP 0 or less), and can be used to make him better. You do not die instantly at 0 or even negative HP: if your wounds are treated and that pushes you to positive HP, you will survive (at least until the infection sets in with failed/absent Chirurgery rolls).

2. Space permitting (let's say they're on an open field with few opponents), can Knights attack every round with a lance charge? Or is that generally used more for the initial charge into melee and then they switch to a different weapon?

On 1. and 3. I have nothing substantial to add to Moriens answers. (Re point 1, I generally assume that unless there is plenty of room for maneuver and the PK is going really fast, he doesn't overshoot his target: he just stops after his charge, and begins the next turn standing still in close combat with whatever he attacked (it it still alive) - with a spear in his hand).

BUT: note that "Perform a maneuver on horseback", including "turn around" is a "moving action" and takes a full round. Thus, if targets line themselves up in a nice straight line, with at least 6 yds between them (and the spear doesn't break) a knight could theoretically charge round after round after round. But as soon as they are not thus lined up, he would need a maneuver to get his horse to turn around.

Thanks for the replies. I like the idea of an initial lance charge followed by close combat being the norm.

Well, my first game is tonight. I'll see how it goes.

Well, my first game is tonight. I'll see how it goes.


Good luck! :)

We had our first session of the game last night. I had a great time and it went well. It seemed like the players had fun too, but I've been busy and we haven't touched bases yet today.

Here's a recap of the game session:
http://underworldcleaningservice.blogspot.com/2012/03/game-recap-ran-session-of-5th-edition.html