I realize that honor and glory and usually the sole domain of the nobility, but do those who skirt the line between nobility and commons, for example a sergeant or esquire, have glory and honor? What about warriors from cultures without knighthood?

I'd allow it. What a tribal warrior might think honorable is probably not identical to a knights: for example, ambushing and ganging up on an enemy might be totally honorable (and smart!) for a Pict warrior, while it would be deplored as ungentlemanly by the Logres knights.

Honor: It is a passion so anyone can have it, although it can mean different things. As Morien points out something can be seen as honorable by one culture and be dishonorable by another.

Glory: I think everyone can have glory, even esquires and sergeants. But glory is gained by being good at your role within society. So an esquire would not gain glory for slaying a monster, but could get it when in slaying the monster he saves his master. Of course this can eventually lead that the esquire is knighted. It is the duty of the knight to be knightly, a lady to be ladylike and an esquire to serve. If you step out of your role would not gain glory.

But glory is gained by being good at your role within society... If you step out of your role would not gain glory.


I am not convinced of that. First of all, the introductory adventure of the Bear of Imber has squires fighting the bear and bandits, and they do gain Glory for it. Evil knights gain Glory for dastardly deeds as well (although you could argue that fighting, no matter how it is done, is within the knightly purview). It is simply that squires and ladies seldom get a chance to gain Glory by defeating opponents. But if they do, they'd get the Glory, IMHO.

But glory is gained by being good at your role within society... If you step out of your role would not gain glory.


I am not convinced of that. First of all, the introductory adventure of the Bear of Imber has squires fighting the bear and bandits, and they do gain Glory for it. Evil knights gain Glory for dastardly deeds as well (although you could argue that fighting, no matter how it is done, is within the knightly purview). It is simply that squires and ladies seldom get a chance to gain Glory by defeating opponents. But if they do, they'd get the Glory, IMHO.


I consider glory something like reputation. In class (knights) are more likely to be known and act in ways to collect it. But others will collect it as well for actions that are noticed and talked about by noble society. So squires and ladies can get glory.

And also note how there are examples of glory being gained for being a *bad* example as well.

But glory is gained by being good at your role within society... If you step out of your role would not gain glory.


I am not convinced of that. First of all, the introductory adventure of the Bear of Imber has squires fighting the bear and bandits, and they do gain Glory for it. Evil knights gain Glory for dastardly deeds as well (although you could argue that fighting, no matter how it is done, is within the knightly purview). It is simply that squires and ladies seldom get a chance to gain Glory by defeating opponents. But if they do, they'd get the Glory, IMHO.




I consider glory something like reputation. In class (knights) are more likely to be known and act in ways to collect it. But others will collect it as well for actions that are noticed and talked about by noble society. So squires and ladies can get glory.

And also note how there are examples of glory being gained for being a *bad* example as well.


I agree. I assume that knights gain more glory and gain it faster. I see Merlin as having considerable glory because of his position in court and his immense power. Merlin is so well known that his name is recognized in the Holy Roman Empire and beyond....

That being said, if I was presented with a squire with 2000 glory and a knight with 1500 glory, the knight may have the advantage. It is after all a knight's world.

I agree. And also I expect that the exploits of a non-knight would quickly drop identifying the person explicitly as word spread; e.g. "Did you hear about that squire who killed a wyvern!" instead of "Did you hear about Squire Blaen of Carduel who killed a wyvern!". Though once he's Sir Blaen that he killed a wyvern while still a squire would be part of his reputation and renown.

Well, a knight has more status. That counts for a lot. An earl with 3000 Glory outranks a knight with 10000 Glory. But I think the knight would be more known, more widely recognized. Which is what Glory measures, in part. Same thing with a squire, but the difference is that the squire doesn't have heraldry of his own, which makes recognizing him that much harder unless he introduces himself. But Glory is Glory.

Well, a knight has more status. That counts for a lot. An earl with 3000 Glory outranks a knight with 10000 Glory. But I think the knight would be more known, more widely recognized. Which is what Glory measures, in part. Same thing with a squire, but the difference is that the squire doesn't have heraldry of his own, which makes recognizing him that much harder unless he introduces himself. But Glory is Glory.


How about a peasant that cleverly comes up with a way to kill a wyrm?
:D

How about a peasant that cleverly comes up with a way to kill a wyrm?
:D


See Farmer Giles of Ham. :P

(If a peasant does something Glorious, like killing a Wyrm, then yes, he would get Glory. It probably just doesn't matter, since killing a Wyrm tends to be less than 1000 Glory, which means all knights would still outrank him in Glory as well as status. Also, clever ways tend to give less Glory than good old hack and slash. :P )

For the example of a mere esquire gaining Glory in combat, please read Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's "Sir Nigel" -- available for free via Project Gutenberg. Nigel of Loring spends most of the book as a squire, whose family's remaining lands will not support him in a knightly fashion even though his father was a high-glory knight.

And Morien, thank you for reminding me of Farmer Giles of Ham! A great story.

Or indeed 'The White Company' (the novel to which 'Sir Nigel' is the prequel) where Sir Nigel Loring is the older mentor and example of chivalry to Alleyne Edricson, the young protagonist of the story who goes on to earn significant glory as a squire in his turn.

Returning to the topic, of course squires have glory - you roll for it (or inherit it) during chargen. I'm running a set of players as 'esquires' (scare quotes because the role doesn't formally exist in the late anarchy) at present in my campaign - that is, they are of age, but didn't have a sufficient inheritance to be knighted at the end of chargen. So the game is currently all about how they acquire sufficient notice for someone to grant them the boon of knighthood.

I give them glory as normal for any exploits they manage to perform, famous traits and the like; but the total they accumulate during the year gets divided by 10 at the point during winter phase that it gets transferred to their permanent glory score. I've told them that this will no longer happen once they get dubbed and I find that them seeing a nice pot of glory get reduced to 30-40 points at the end of the year is a useful spur for their ambition.

Regards
Luke

I realize that honor and glory and usually the sole domain of the nobility, but do those who skirt the line between nobility and commons, for example a sergeant or esquire, have glory and honor?

o


What about warriors from cultures without knighthood?

G
M call

[quote author=Rob link=topic=1664.msg13397#msg13397 date=1339189607]
I realize that honor and glory and usually the sole domain of the nobility, but do those who skirt the line between nobility and commons, for example a sergeant or esquire, have glory and honor?

No


What about warriors from cultures without knighthood?

GM call

I realize that honor and glory and usually the sole domain of the nobility, but do those who skirt the line between nobility and commons, for example a sergeant or esquire, have glory and honor?

No
?


Meaning no esquires and sergeants do not have glory, or no meaning honor and glory are not solely privileges of the nobility.

I realize that honor and glory and usually the sole domain of the nobility, but do those who skirt the line between nobility and commons, for example a sergeant or esquire, have glory and honor?

No
[/quote]
[/quote]
Meaning no esquires and sergeants do not have glory, or no meaning honor and glory are not solely privileges of the nobility.
[/quote]
Honor and Glory are the sole privilege of the nobility
knights, squires, esquires and so on
It is a matter of class, not of job
thus an esquire serving as a sergeant can collect Glory
while the commoner next to him, with the same equipment and duty, does not

totally snobbish!

I realize that honor and glory and usually the sole domain of the nobility, but do those who skirt the line between nobility and commons, for example a sergeant or esquire, have glory and honor?

No

[/quote]
Meaning no esquires and sergeants do not have glory, or no meaning honor and glory are not solely privileges of the nobility.
[/quote]
Honor and Glory are the sole privilege of the nobility
knights, squires, esquires and so on
It is a matter of class, not of job
thus an esquire serving as a sergeant can collect Glory
while the commoner next to him, with the same equipment and duty, does not

totally snobbish!
[/quote]
Interesting. So how does a commoner acquire both? Being knighted? If so do we count glory and/or honor from deeds before being knighted?

Sorry if I'm splitting hairs on this, but one of the things I love about Pendragon is asking questions about and getting answers from Greg himself.

Honor and Glory are the sole privilege of the nobility
knights, squires, esquires and so on
It is a matter of class, not of job
thus an esquire serving as a sergeant can collect Glory
while the commoner next to him, with the same equipment and duty, does not
totally snobbish!

Interesting. So how does a commoner acquire both? Being knighted?
[/quote]
That would work, although it is more likely he would be squired


If so do we count glory and/or honor from deeds before being knighted?

I'd say no,
with the exception being a chunk of Glory for whatever deed he did that got him promoted to the upper class
If it was a batch of lesser4 deeds, he'd get some, but not as if he had been a knight doing the same deeds


Sorry if I'm splitting hairs on this, but one of the things I love about Pendragon is asking questions about and getting answers from Greg himself.

I am flattered
thank you
I love the game too :) and am happy to clarify fine points that seem beyond others as knowledgeable as myself
which is to say
if you have an idea of an answer, please reply!