As far as I'm aware, if you're making the son of your previous PK, then he inherits all of his traits and passions. This is a "good" thing if you're keeping the same religion, but if your Pagan Knight's son finds Jesus, then you're going to be a little backwards in a few areas.

Then again it can be "bad." If your knight spends 20-30 years building up his traits and passions and has several passions at 16+ and both his religious and chivalry bonuses, then lets see... for a British Christian there are a total of eight traits that affect the religious bonus and the chivalric bonus (some overlap, none are opposing). Then lets assume he's got the starting passions at 16 (easy to do over the course of a long career), and an additional three more that have risen to 16.

16x8=128 Glory per year from Traits
16x7=112 Glory per year from Passions
100 Glory per year from Chivalry Bonus
100 Glory per year from Religious Bonus

Your brand new, freshly minted PK is sitting at a pretty 440 Glory per year just from the traits and passions he inherited from his father. Keep in mind that this total is lacking the Glory per year form quality of maintenance and from his holdings. This is also a low estimate.

Lets say that instead of passions at 16, they were closer to 20. Lets also assume, in addition to the mandatory 4, he has Hate (Saxons), Amor (Lady), Loyalty (Pendragon), Loyalty (Comrades), Concern (Commoners), and Love (God) all at 18 (or between 16-20 averaging at 18). Also, getting these at such a high value isn't too hard; especially if you try. Some can have their value chosen, and others must be rolled, but bonuses can get so high they may start as high as 20 (check out Loyalty (Group) KAP 5.1 pg78).

Then lets say his important traits are also between 16-20, with Pious and Honest thrown in, and lets assume they are all around 18 also. That makes 20 traits and passions that are average out at 18.

18x20=360

Then add in another two hundred from Chivalry and Religious bonuses (totaling 560) and if all your Knight does is sit around at his manor, he still gains a Glory Point every other year!

Now, the question is this: If your knight goes around looking for things to do, and is active in the campaign, then his reputation for being his father's son will follow him and he will become known. This makes his Glory per year acceptable. It also helps him keep up with the other Player Knights who either haven't died yet and are very powerful (comparatively), or if he was the last of his generation to die then it will help him catch up with the other "youngsters."

This is a good thing. No one runs a DnD game for five or six months, then when a long standing character dies makes the player reroll a level one character while everyone else is level seven or eight. That's a horrible campaign choice for the DM to make. So inheriting your Knight's father's traits and passions is a good thing, keeping party disparity to a minimum when Knights start dropping and sons start popping.

And who cares if the player knights start getting powerful? So what if your new guy is twice the knight his father was when the campaign started? Average people are not what good games are about! Ever hear something like this:

"I remember this one game I was in; everyone had perfectly average characters and we weren't overpowered at all. IT WAS SO COOL!"

Didn't think so.

Let your player's characters get powerful. There isn't anything wrong with that.

Besides, doesn't it make sense for the moral standards to rise just as quickly as the technology throughout the GPC timeline? Starting with the basic character creation from the book and then increasing them over a decades long career, then moving on to the new Knight who picks up where the old one left off sounds like a perfect way to simulate the rapid progression of morality that would accompany the similar rise of civilization and technology...

Yay big words!

As far as I know you do not inherit the traits of your father. So no automatic chivalry or religious bonuses. If you use the BoK&L and you roll very good you may start with it.

Furthermore only the additional passions (hate and such) are copied from your father, but not the standard loyalty(lord), honor, love(Family) and hospitality.

But that is as far as I know.

As far as I know you do not inherit the traits of your father.

Yes you do. It's on p. 53 in the 5.1 ed rule book. It's a very important rule, since it as at the core of the dynastic, long term game.

In 5.1 edition, High Traits and Passions do not generate automatic glory.

In 5.1 edition, High Traits and Passions do not generate automatic glory.


Interesting, I was able to easily find in KAP 5.1 where it clearly states, "No Glory is gained for simply having high Traits or
Passions," and then I found the Annual Glory section in the BoK&L where it has Traits and Passions over 16 adding to the total.

In 5.1 edition, High Traits and Passions do not generate automatic glory.


Interesting, I was able to easily find in KAP 5.1 where it clearly states, "No Glory is gained for simply having high Traits or
Passions," and then I found the Annual Glory section in the BoK&L where it has Traits and Passions over 16 adding to the total.


It's worse. for there are parts of the 5.1 ed rulebook that states the same. But this is a known errata; high traits and passions do not generate annual glory.

It's worse. for there are parts of the 5.1 ed rulebook that states the same. But this is a known errata; high traits and passions do not generate annual glory.


Why would that get taken out? Is there anything else that gets added to the annual glory in it's place?

Seems like the only thing taking out passions and traits from annual glory will do is reduce the amount of overall glory players get, reducing them in personal power. Why would you want to do that? There's nothing wrong with having players whose characters are more powerful than the average knight.

EDITED for redundancy.

Why would that get taken out? Is there anything else that gets added to the annual glory in it's place?

Seems like the only thing taking out passions and traits from annual glory will do is reduce the amount of overall glory players get, reducing them in personal power. Why would you want to do that? There's nothing wrong with having players whose characters are more powerful than the average knight.

It is not replaced.

I don't know why Greg wanted to remove it, but I do know why I think is the single most important rule change in the history of this game: because without it, you'll get glory inflation, and glory inflation breaks this game. Both the combat- and the aging-systems breaks down if you have glory inflation, making PKs well neigh immortal. With a good passion or two there is nothing in the game, more or less, that can defeat a PK with weapon skills in the 25 to 35 range. And with 400-600 annual glory, aging will not even dent a characters stats.

My beef is not that PKs get "too good" compared to the the great knights in the stories, really, just that the game system can't handle characters with high glory. If you want I high glory game I would recommend, 1) cap combat skills at 25 and 2) double all aging.

Another GOOD THING with removing annual glory for Traits and Passions is that it frees players from having to make extreme character builds to keep in competition. If you do give annual glory for Traits and Passions, many players will feel more or less forced into getting 16+ in all their PK's Traits and Passion, to keep up with those other PKs in the group who will have that, creating very extreme characters. If this pressure is removed, players can focus on the Traits and Passions that they really want their characters to have.

Why would that get taken out? Is there anything else that gets added to the annual glory in it's place?

Seems like the only thing taking out passions and traits from annual glory will do is reduce the amount of overall glory players get, reducing them in personal power. Why would you want to do that? There's nothing wrong with having players whose characters are more powerful than the average knight.

It is not replaced.

I don't know why Greg wanted to remove it, but I do know why I think is the single most important rule change in the history of this game: because without it, you'll get glory inflation, and glory inflation breaks this game. Both the combat- and the aging-systems breaks down if you have glory inflation, making PKs well neigh immortal. With a good passion or two there is nothing in the game, more or less, that can defeat a PK with weapon skills in the 25 to 35 range. And with 400-600 annual glory, aging will not even dent a characters stats.



25-35!?!?! How are your PKs doing that? In my campaign that would fall apart at court if they emphasized weapon skills that much.

25-35!?!?! How are your PKs doing that? In my campaign that would fall apart at court if they emphasized weapon skills that much.


Years back I thought I'd try playing a squire for something different. I was serving another PK, and in his second or third session was that night Battle at Humber (year 516 GPC).

He distinguished himself and saved a noblewoman from a certain raping and death against 4 Saxons warriors single handedly killing them all (most intense gaming fight from a player's perspective I've ever done, awesome edge of seat stuff). He was knighted at 16 (?!) as a result of that (and as a result of some exceptional oratory by his knight to his Lord).

I thought, ok then there goes my idea to play a squire, but instead I'll make him a sword specialist, it would work nicely off how he started his career, as the 'best swordsman' in the land, etc. etc.

I placed every Glory point in to Sword. He had quite a long and distinguished career and ended on 17K+ Glory, and a Sword skill of 37.

In the end he was reaping in 193 Glory from Traits, 111 Glory from Passions, 100 Chivalry, 100 Religious, 20 or so from Land Income. 500+ Annual a year for sitting on his arse. As a player it was awesome, looking back as a GM I understand now how broken and disjointed it made our sessions, as we had players with new knights coming in and it was difficult for our GM to present balanced, fair adventures that gave everyone a chance to participate equally. He had to throw in adversaries that were way above what most of the party could face simply to present my knight a challenge.

I purposely did not develop his Lance, which was still at 10 after 20 years (!), which made for a lot of fun in tournaments where he would get repeatedly knocked off his horse in early rounds, only to issue multiple challenges for 'Sword on foot' and witness knights scatter in all directions to avoid all manner of pain and hurt.

It was fun, but then it got out of hand when the Skill was 30+. Excessive Glory snowballs in to unbalanced characters. He was nigh on untouchable in combat, so never suffered a major wound which I see now from a GM perspective as a foil to Glory point expenditure, it will get you eventually!

I think it's a very valid choice to use Glory on skills, combat skills, and I in fact encourage it in the game I currently run, however it was the excessive Glory he gained that broke things in the end, over 20 years, 10K Glory from doing... nothing!

All that said, I still do allow annual Glory from Traits/Passions now, however my preference is to cap this at 100 Glory max combined (which seems to be the cap of choice for other areas).

Players are happy in that they still receive Glory for what they are known for, but there is an upper limit to what you can get so things don't get too out of hand. I do realise 5.1 removed it, but it works for our group to retain the rule in a reduced fashion. We'll see how it goes...

There are plenty of ways to kill off a knight without having to just sit around and wait for him to die of old age. Many of the monsters my previous group faced could have squashed any of us with a luck hit, and we weren't smart enough to stay away from them! We actively sought out any strange beasts (giants, giant animals, manticore, we were even going to track down a dragon, but the Earl forbade it :'() that were terrorizing Salisbury, and when Salisbury was depopulated of strange and dangerous beasts we went a little further afield (not really, but we did manage a few kills away from home).

Most knights can get taken down by a lucky blow from a decently sized giant (or even a Saxon). All that's required is a little luck, or better yet a battle! If the knights happen to get stuck in and roll up a good mix of archers and melee units, free shots from ranged weapons can be extremely deadly. Even if it's just fighting two Saxons, having to split your impassioned 40 skill against two Saxons with a 15 Two-Handed skill impassioned to 25 each is going to hurt... a lot!

So with combat being so potentially deadly (if you set it up right) there isn't a reason to sit around and wait for age to kick in. Just talk to your player about having the son take over. Let him play two characters for a couple of years after the son is knighted, then have the father get double or triple teamed to death. Having a son become Knighted in 516 and step into his father's shoes after the Battle of Badon would be ideal. Or, better yet, have the father die during Badon, and then get the son knighted during the battle. ;D

But yeah, since dynasty is an important role in Pendragon, just talk to your players about, "dynastying" down to their PK's sons.

Failing that, remember, when a GM fudges a dice roll, it isn't, "cheating," it's, "moving the story along."

Why would that get taken out? Is there anything else that gets added to the annual glory in it's place?

Seems like the only thing taking out passions and traits from annual glory will do is reduce the amount of overall glory players get, reducing them in personal power. Why would you want to do that? There's nothing wrong with having players whose characters are more powerful than the average knight.

It is not replaced.

I don't know why Greg wanted to remove it, but I do know why I think is the single most important rule change in the history of this game: because without it, you'll get glory inflation, and glory inflation breaks this game. Both the combat- and the aging-systems breaks down if you have glory inflation, making PKs well neigh immortal. With a good passion or two there is nothing in the game, more or less, that can defeat a PK with weapon skills in the 25 to 35 range. And with 400-600 annual glory, aging will not even dent a characters stats.

My beef is not that PKs get "too good" compared to the the great knights in the stories, really, just that the game system can't handle characters with high glory. If you want I high glory game I would recommend, 1) cap combat skills at 25 and 2) double all aging.

Another GOOD THING with removing annual glory for Traits and Passions is that it frees players from having to make extreme character builds to keep in competition. If you do give annual glory for Traits and Passions, many players will feel more or less forced into getting 16+ in all their PK's Traits and Passion, to keep up with those other PKs in the group who will have that, creating very extreme characters. If this pressure is removed, players can focus on the Traits and Passions that they really want their characters to have.


Imho: Glory should be gained from action. The glory from high traits and passions does not do that. I think Greg said something similar in other threads as well.

In the end he was reaping in 193 Glory from Traits, 111 Glory from Passions, 100 Chivalry, 100 Religious, 20 or so from Land Income. 500+ Annual a year for sitting on his arse.

<snippage>

I think it's a very valid choice to use Glory on skills, combat skills, and I in fact encourage it in the game I currently run, however it was the excessive Glory he gained that broke things in the end, over 20 years, 10K Glory from doing... nothing!


Firstly I just want to pick up on the 'sitting on his arse/doing nothing' points - IMG he would be doing a bunch of stuff off screen as part of his 'best swordsman in the land' schtick that garners him that glory and I would make sure some of that stuff would come up at the table as tangential comments, NPC reactions, framing of the action or similar. Indeed as a GM I would strive to ensure that the year's adventure would come about because of this 'background glory' occasionally.

Secondly his being top sword dude with skill in the high 30s and extraordinary glory kicks him up into the top tier of the game world where he rubs shoulders with RT knights as a matter of course - that requires the GM to recognise this and modulate the game appropriately, which sounds like it didn't happen in your case, but I don't think it's a game-breaker as such.

Thirdly as aspirant evil-GM, I would relish having a one trick pony like that character to torture IMG. Like Rob said - court scenarios (even more, the rigours of Fine Amour) are perfect for challenging character builds like that.

Regards
Luke

I think a better solution would be to drop the glory bonuses for Religious/Chivalric.
They are splendid rewards in their own right, and the glory bonus seems to be over egging the cake.

that cuts out the 200 glory top-up on top of Trait glory, and counters the inflationary tendencies.

I think that Religious Knight glory is earned since it does take some work to get and maintain those traits. Downside is that it essentially generates 180+ glory/year rather than 100 since the necessary traits all have to be 16 or higher and will grant glory on their own. Glory for Chivalric Knight is similar, but in the current rules do not require all traits involved at or above 16 causing the same effect.

Hmm, let me look at a couple of characters in the current campaign. (I have a couple of semi-retired bannerets who have annual glory in the 300 range.)

First banneret - 15,000 glory (approx) at age 56.
346 glory per year. 73 for traits, 73 for passions, 100 for chivalric, 100 for lands (castle, control of about 12 manor equivalents)
He had four campaign years when he gained 1000+ glory in a year (Knighted, St Alban's, made KOTR, Badon Hill). And he only got the banneretcy with the higher glory for lands about fifteen years ago.

Note: I think this knight has the highest glory of any PK in this campaign. He has been a study in contrasts, passionate, and also very lucky in battles. And he is not a heavy combat knight, his Sword and Spear skills just got to 20 fairly recently. He's the Intrigue specialist (22) in the group.

Second banneret - 14,000 glory (approx) at age 53.
338 glory per year. 88 for traits, 52 for passions, 100 for chivalric, 98 for lands (castle, control of about 12 manor equivalents)
[Hmm, he's also Marshall of Salisbury - probably something additional for that, but I'm not quibbling.]
Another knight lucky for surviving most of the rounds in battles, thus very good glory in the major battle years. And he sticks around even when wounded since the group has a major Battle skill drop-off if he is not leading (21 to 15).

From this I make the following observations:
1. Getting banneret/baron status is a major step up in annual glory. From 6-20 per year it will get close to the 100 per year limit in most cases in my opinion.

2. Chivalric or religious added onto the trait glory can add up quickly. But it also to a degree is what glory revolves around - what the character is known for. And high traits are fodder for the GM to challenge the knight on.

3. Capping the trait/passion total might be an approach, but that in turn makes the glory for land holdings all the more valuable in comparison. Which means a simple vassal knight centered on deeds, passions, etc. will probably still get buried by a rich banneret "sitting on his arse"*.

And I think that adding further rules and restrictions will not have the intended consequences. If a player is going to min-max stuff for glory, it will still happen. If you strip out annual glory for traits (and/or passions) I presume the player will run the character for the minimum traits to get the special bonuses and then go push play towards the other glory enhancers (lands, and getting and spending money).

* - Which isn't always the case. First banneret above got pulled out last session to deal with ravaging giant pigs. See "Bacon Quest" over in one of the other forums.

Note: The current campaign I am in does random trait, stat, and passion generation for sons. They can inherit passions (with an adjustment), but otherwise are essentially their own men. Which has been interesting since the two chivalric bannerets above have very few knighted sons who are chivalric themselves. I personally like the variety since the trait combinations can be very fun to play out. (First banneret above has notable Just and Vengeful - and bided his time to get a shot at Prince Cynric after the Prince killed his father at Netley Marsh. Took ten years, but he eventually collected a head.)

I think the central consideration to whether or not Traits and Passions should award Annual Glory is: what is Glory? It isn't just how much XP your Knight has, although it certainly is that. It is mostly how well known your knight is.

The higher your Knight's Glory, the more people know of/about him. This is represented by the Glory/1000 bonus to things like Heraldry rolls to recognize him, or the bonus to Courtesy rolls at court, etc.

So a Knight with high Glory is going to be more well known, and since he's more well known, people will talk about the things he's done and speculate on what he might do in certain situations (like talking about your favorite comic book characters nowadays).

Therefore, if said knight has high Personality Traits, then it is easier for people to know who he is (because of his "extremeness"), and if it makes it easier for people to know him, then he will become more well known, and thus gain more Glory (satisfying the second part of what Glory is).

Also, maintaining high principles is going to force the Knight into more difficult situations, or make inevitable situations more difficult. This will make said Knight try harder, and push himself more, than a Knight without such high Traits (satisfying the first definition of what Glory is).

With those things in mind, it makes perfect sense for Annual Glory to be gained for high Traits and Passions.

Also, in regards to the Knight "sitting on his arse" in order to gain the benefits... I've never heard of a PK that was like that. They're always trying to go out and do stuff, but since each year is supposed to be run in a single session, there is going to be lots of stuff that happens off camera. Those things may be insignificant, but a Knight with high Traits and Passions is going to be less likely to sit around doing nothing (although I suppose an argument could be made for a Knight famous for his Prudence, but then again he's also going to be more likely to micro manage everything).

Anyways, that's just my $0.02.

25-35!?!?! How are your PKs doing that? In my campaign that would fall apart at court if they emphasized weapon skills that much.

Thirdly as aspirant evil-GM, I would relish having a one trick pony like that character to torture IMG. Like Rob said - court scenarios (even more, the rigours of Fine Amour) are perfect for challenging character builds like that.
Courtly and Combat skills don’t compete that much with each other (particularly not once you get a bit into the story, when most players have built up a good store of high Traits and Passions for their characters). Once a player has 20 in the “Holy Trinity” (Horsemanship, Lance, Sword) and starts pumping them with Glory, he can train courtly skills. I’ve seen many a melee monster with excellent courtly skills.

There are plenty of ways to kill off a knight without having to just sit around and wait for him to die of old age. Many of the monsters my previous group faced could have squashed any of us with a luck hit, and we weren't smart enough to stay away from them! We actively sought out any strange beasts (giants, giant animals, manticore, we were even going to track down a dragon, but the Earl forbade it :'() that were terrorizing Salisbury, and when Salisbury was depopulated of strange and dangerous beasts we went a little further afield (not really, but we did manage a few kills away from home).
Most knights can get taken down by a lucky blow from a decently sized giant (or even a Saxon). All that's required is a little luck, or better yet a battle! If the knights happen to get stuck in and roll up a good mix of archers and melee units, free shots from ranged weapons can be extremely deadly. Even if it's just fighting two Saxons, having to split your impassioned 40 skill against two Saxons with a 15 Two-Handed skill impassioned to 25 each is going to hurt... a lot!
So with combat being so potentially deadly (if you set it up right) there isn't a reason to sit around and wait for age to kick in.
Sure! But you can’t just assassinate PKs because they have good combat skills. Even if you throw them into difficult combats, you have to be fair.
Another issue is that it’s rare to have all PKs at the same level. So, to challenge some PKs you might have to send in opponents who might slaughter other PKs, for exempla new dubbed knights or PKs who are balanced. So it isn’t really that easy.

Just talk to your player about having the son take over. Let him play two characters for a couple of years after the son is knighted, then have the father get double or triple teamed to death. Having a son become Knighted in 516 and step into his father's shoes after the Battle of Badon would be ideal. Or, better yet, have the father die during Badon, and then get the son knighted during the battle. ;D
But yeah, since dynasty is an important role in Pendragon, just talk to your players about, "dynastying" down to their PK's sons.
Some players won’t. And then you’ll just have to let them play their old characters.

Failing that, remember, when a GM fudges a dice roll, it isn't, "cheating," it's, "moving the story along."
I don’t fudge rolls. My players must be able to trust me. A game master without his players trust is doomed.

I think a better solution would be to drop the glory bonuses for Religious/Chivalric.
They are splendid rewards in their own right, and the glory bonus seems to be over egging the cake.

that cuts out the 200 glory top-up on top of Trait glory, and counters the inflationary tendencies.

Although the official situation is to drop Glory for Traits, and keep those for attaining Chivalry and Religious bonuses.

I think a better solution would be to drop the glory bonuses for Religious/Chivalric.
They are splendid rewards in their own right, and the glory bonus seems to be over egging the cake.

that cuts out the 200 glory top-up on top of Trait glory, and counters the inflationary tendencies.

Although the official situation is to drop Glory for Traits, and keep those for attaining Chivalry and Religious bonuses.


Which makes glory from high traits a sort of "plateau" phenomena. If a certain set reaches notable (16+) a 100 glory bonus materializes. And if the right combination of additional ones make it as well it goes to 200 glory (getting both Religious and Chivalry). I guess it's a solution, but it just seems a little punishing. Though it also puts a greater incentive towards reaching those goals I guess.

Does 5.1 remove annual glory for traits, or traits *and* passions?

If it's just traits then my two example banneret knights from the earlier comment would roughly drop from their current 330-350 annual glory to 250-270 annual glory. Still a fairly heft "default".

Does 5.1 remove annual glory for traits, or traits *and* passions

*and*!

While I think there are many ways to go here, and that they do have different implications for player behavior (and how we understand Glory) there is no doubt in my mind that a cap of some kind is needed for Annual glory from personality. And I think that 200 or so is the right level.

As an alternative - re the "sitting on one's ass and collecting glory" problem (which do bother me, personally, not because that it is in any way unreasonable from a game world perspective that Glory is collected passively, but because I think that in a game balance perspective activity should be important) - I would suggest that each Trait or Passion checked in the Winter Phase give its value i annual Glory (so Lustful 11 with a check would give 11 in Glory in the Winter Phase, but Valorous 20 without a check would give no Glory, etc): this means that PKs only get glory for their personality to the extent that it is active in the game. This has the added advantage, as the GM is the final arbiter of what gets checked, the GM will have a lot of control over glory from Traits and Passions.

But if I did run a campaign at the moment, I'd probably go with "100 for Chiv, 100 for Religion, and that its" - because its simple and emphases living up to High Ideals. (Whats so glorious of having Indulgent 16, after all).

Another issue is that it’s rare to have all PKs at the same level. So, to challenge some PKs you might have to send in opponents who might slaughter other PKs, for exempla new dubbed knights or PKs who are balanced. So it isn’t really that easy.


Sure it's easy. Just double team the powerful PK with moderately decent fighters. If Mr. 40 Sword Skill has to fight two guys with skills around 15-20, then he has to split his dice, and if he can impassion, then so can the enemies. While a weak/new PK vs the same guy would be about an even match, two or three of them vs one guy (even Lancelot) is going to get bothersome quick.

And you don't have to assassinate PK's for having high stats, kill them when the time is right, when they've gotten to the point where it's time to retire and they have a good backup character.

Sure it's easy. Just double team the powerful PK with moderately decent fighters. If Mr. 40 Sword Skill has to fight two guys with skills around 15-20, then he has to split his dice, and if he can impassion, then so can the enemies. While a weak/new PK vs the same guy would be about an even match, two or three of them vs one guy (even Lancelot) is going to get bothersome quick.

Okay, we have four knights in the group. Sir A - a monster, Sir B - a good knight, Sir C and D - young or average. The big hitter engages Sir A and defeats him, leaving him unconscious while the other PKs defeat their weaker opponents. Now, the bigger hitter (say a Saxon berserker or a savage griffon) will hardly run away. In the following combat, Sir C and D are killed, while Sir A gets First Aid and survives. What have you achieved now?

You just can't control a combat, nor the outcomes of a combat. So it is not that easy.


And you don't have to assassinate PK's for having high stats, kill them when the time is right, when they've gotten to the point where it's time to retire and they have a good backup character.

I don't kill PKs when I feel like it. Sure, if a player wanted a opportunity to go out with a bang I would help him, but if he (she?) doesn't want to retire his good PK I would not just slaughter it a my whims.

Does 5.1 remove annual glory for traits, or traits *and* passions



*and*!

Hmm. OK, let's lump in passions with traits then. In which case I do think something should be in place for the knights who have not reached one of the bonuses.


While I think there are many ways to go here, and that they do have different implications for player behavior (and how we understand Glory) there is no doubt in my mind that a cap of some kind is needed for Annual glory from personality. And I think that 200 or so is the right level.

With some thought overnight I was think a cap of 50 for traits would do, or maybe 100 as long as the PK doesn't have a trait bonus for Chivalry or Religion. So that puts in at 50 - 100 - 200 as a progression. A sop to the young knights working towards these higher goals. Otherwise, what is there about them to talk about? ;)


As an alternative - re the "sitting on one's ass and collecting glory" problem (which do bother me, personally, not because that it is in any way unreasonable from a game world perspective that Glory is collected passively, but because I think that in a game balance perspective activity should be important) - I would suggest that each Trait or Passion checked in the Winter Phase give its value i annual Glory (so Lustful 11 with a check would give 11 in Glory in the Winter Phase, but Valorous 20 without a check would give no Glory, etc): this means that PKs only get glory for their personality to the extent that it is active in the game. This has the added advantage, as the GM is the final arbiter of what gets checked, the GM will have a lot of control over glory from Traits and Passions.

That's an interesting idea if you hold activity (and thus the trait/passion in use) as the reason the nobility notices it. Though if a GM uses some of the non-canon solo generation materials these can generate undefined trait and passion checks for a knight. This would require a higher degree of oversight to use these if tighter GM control is desired.


But if I did run a campaign at the moment, I'd probably go with "100 for Chiv, 100 for Religion, and that its" - because its simple and emphases living up to High Ideals. (Whats so glorious of having Indulgent 16, after all).


Well, glory comes for both "good" and "bad" things. Being "The Knights Who Condemned Merlin" was viewed negatively by our party, but also garnered them glory since it was an item talked about by the nobility. Sir Indulgent could well be a gourmand of large appetites; "he ate two whole fried chickens!" and thus the subject of discussion for this.

Which makes glory from high traits a sort of "plateau" phenomena. If a certain set reaches notable (16+) a 100 glory bonus materializes. And if the right combination of additional ones make it as well it goes to 200 glory (getting both Religious and Chivalry). I guess it's a solution, but it just seems a little punishing. Though it also puts a greater incentive towards reaching those goals I guess.

btw, I play now that obtaining Chivalry requires 90 points in the underlined traits


Does 5.1 remove annual glory for traits, or traits *and* passions?

No. Passions still get their own Glory


If it's just traits then my two example banneret knights from the earlier comment would roughly drop from their current 330-350 annual glory to 250-270 annual glory. Still a fairly heft "default".

If your primary concern is that knights who are out of action get the default Glory, then simply require that they play actively
or
reduce non-played bonuses to 50 points
that would work, right?

btw, I play now that obtaining Chivalry requires 90 points in the underlined traits


Is this to be errata'd or still a work in progress with previously mentioned 'sliding scale' Chivalry rewards and possible other personality behaviour set rewards?

btw, I play now that obtaining Chivalry requires 90 points in the underlined traits


Is this to be errata'd or still a work in progress with previously mentioned 'sliding scale' Chivalry rewards and possible other personality behaviour set rewards?

I ought to be in the errata
I am still considering the consequences of having lesser rewards in a chivalrous game

How can I follow the guy that wrote the system having only played the game a few times and only building up to running for the first time....

Like this :p

How does the idea of allowing Glory bonuses for traits upto the point where the relevant Chivalry/Religion Bonus is attained? essentially giving a bonus for achieving the status (I.E stats need to be 80+ but the Titled Bonus is 100.) Traits may still be developed beyond the required 16 (average) but more to secure the bonus than to improve it.

I have a prospective player that isnt struck on playing a chivalrous type character at all (and thus wasnt keen to play), until I pointed out that not all characters need to be that archtype, but I wouldnt like to see him "punished" by not gaining his due for "played to" renown traits. Of course I do see the possibility of other PK leaving him behind IF all other factor remain equal.

The other thing that occurred to me, if Inherited Honour applies at the time of a Father's Death OR at the point at which the Son in Knighted, why not knight the son quickly and impose a player decision as to which character to continue to develop, the older knight's newly gained Glory will not affect the son (thus causing the possible reduced effectiveness of the son) and if the son is played the older knights lack of "action" again doesn't impact on the campaign.

Finally, do sons further down the inheritance chain gain Inherited Glory? and is it at the same value as the first son or at the knights current glory? (divided by 10 of course).

Hope that comes across with the level of respect I view this site with, I am not confident of my writing ability as the written word is all too permanent and open to interpretation, and I am unable to judge an initial reaction to apologise/explain/disagree from (body language-wise).

Take care Dalfort

How can I follow the guy that wrote the system having only played the game a few times and only building up to running for the first time....

With courage and hope, I guess.
And the knowledge that I do not pretend this system is perfect.
You did a damn good job here!


Like this :p

Yep :)


How does the idea of allowing Glory bonuses for traits up to the point where the relevant Chivalry/Religion Bonus is attained? essentially giving a bonus for achieving the status (I.E stats need to be 80+ but the Titled Bonus is 100.) Traits may still be developed beyond the required 16 (average) but more to secure the bonus than to improve it.

I can not follow that


I have a prospective player that isnt struck on playing a chivalrous type character at all

Few of my own characters ever attain it


(and thus wasnt keen to play), until I pointed out that not all characters need to be that archtype, but I wouldnt like to see him "punished" by not gaining his due for "played to" renown traits. Of course I do see the possibility of other PK leaving him behind IF all other factor remain equal.

What is the punishment?


The other thing that occurred to me, if Inherited Honour

I presume you mean "inherited Glory", ?


applies at the time of a Father's Death OR at the point at which the Son in Knighted, why not knight the son quickly and impose a player decision as to which character to continue to develop, the older knight's newly gained Glory will not affect the son (thus causing the possible reduced effectiveness of the son) and if the son is played the older knights lack of "action" again doesn't impact on the campaign.

Yea, why not?
What's the question here?


Finally, do sons further down the inheritance chain gain Inherited Glory? and is it at the same value as the first son or at the knights current glory? (divided by 10 of course).

Yes, later sons get inherited Glory
At the rate of 1/10 the father's at that time


Hope that comes across with the level of respect I view this site with, I am not confident of my writing ability as the written word is all too permanent and open to interpretation, and I am unable to judge an initial reaction to apologise/explain/disagree from (body language-wise).

Your respect is apparent
Thank you
And I too prefer clarity before making written pronouncements, hence my questions above

firstly thank-you :D

secondly I can see the failing of my eagerness to write my ideas and the need to construct my posts better in the future, that and not having my wife ask me 4 questions at the same time...

The main thrust of the thread seems to raise concerns that Traits no longer provide Annual Glory bonuses. My (badly written) suggestion was to : Apply renown Traits (16+) bonuses until the said Trait provides the Chivalry/Religious Bonus to which it applies.

For example :

Squire Bliant, aspires to become a chivalrous Knight like his Father.
He starts with most Traits at 13/7 or 10/10 but wishes to be known for his Generous nature (16/4)

My suggestion is he receives this 16 Annual Glory from the trait (He would receive other trait bonuses for 16+ scores too, e.g. when he raises his Energetic or Just.) until such time as he raises and maintains his other chivalrous traits achieving the Chivalrous bonus of 100, but not get both.

I would also treat the religious ones the same with any that apply for both awards only counted once of course. Also any traits that are not designated to either Bonuses would still be awarded for renown (16+)

My original point is that to me it seems then as though an additional amount of Glory is bestowed for attaining the criteria for it... the parts total 80+ (16+ Religious traits) the bonus is 100.
*********

My player and punishment explained : If PK who aspire to be Chivalrous/Religious they gain a Bonus according, I would prefer to see PK receive Glory for renown Traits without such lofty goals being present and removing them I referred to it as a punishment (height of the married life question time unfortunately :P ). If I applied my above house rule he wouldn't lose out.
*********

Chose between Father and Son : No question just an observation or possible solution to avoid the Glory bloat.

2nd+ Sons : If the bloat could affect sibling Inherited Glory then perhaps my Father/Son split would be redundant :) back to the drawing board!

Take care Dalfort

I understand
I have considered the issue of Glory for Traits OR for Chivalry
I encourage everyone to use the standard, or the variant, as is preferred.



firstly thank-you :D

secondly I can see the failing of my eagerness to write my ideas and the need to construct my posts better in the future, that and not having my wife ask me 4 questions at the same time...

The main thrust of the thread seems to raise concerns that Traits no longer provide Annual Glory bonuses. My (badly written) suggestion was to : Apply renown Traits (16+) bonuses until the said Trait provides the Chivalry/Religious Bonus to which it applies.

For example :

Squire Bliant, aspires to become a chivalrous Knight like his Father.
He starts with most Traits at 13/7 or 10/10 but wishes to be known for his Generous nature (16/4)

My suggestion is he receives this 16 Annual Glory from the trait (He would receive other trait bonuses for 16+ scores too, e.g. when he raises his Energetic or Just.) until such time as he raises and maintains his other chivalrous traits achieving the Chivalrous bonus of 100, but not get both.

I would also treat the religious ones the same with any that apply for both awards only counted once of course. Also any traits that are not designated to either Bonuses would still be awarded for renown (16+)

My original point is that to me it seems then as though an additional amount of Glory is bestowed for attaining the criteria for it... the parts total 80+ (16+ Religious traits) the bonus is 100.
*********

My player and punishment explained : If PK who aspire to be Chivalrous/Religious they gain a Bonus according, I would prefer to see PK receive Glory for renown Traits without such lofty goals being present and removing them I referred to it as a punishment (height of the married life question time unfortunately :P ). If I applied my above house rule he wouldn't lose out.
*********

Chose between Father and Son : No question just an observation or possible solution to avoid the Glory bloat.

2nd+ Sons : If the bloat could affect sibling Inherited Glory then perhaps my Father/Son split would be redundant :) back to the drawing board!

Take care Dalfort

I am working my way through the older threads and have just finished reading the Pagan Chivalry one... wished I read it before my player "punishment" comment :p

I am working my way through the older threads and have just finished reading the Pagan Chivalry one... wished I read it before my player "punishment" comment :p

Which comment do you mean?

I am working my way through the older threads and have just finished reading the Pagan Chivalry one... wished I read it before my player "punishment" comment :p

Which comment do you mean?


This one from early:

I have a prospective player that isnt struck on playing a chivalrous type character at all (and thus wasnt keen to play), until I pointed out that not all characters need to be that archtype, but I wouldnt like to see him "punished" by not gaining his due for "played to" renown traits. Of course I do see the possibility of other PK leaving him behind IF all other factor remain equal.

I felt that by disallowing the trait Glory he would be "punished" in regard to the other players... Having read the Pagan Thread and more of the rule book (I am having to roll Traits to stay away long enough to read the rules :D) I see my description was totally off key.

I have just read about the option to defer Glory to another PK, this is what I was doing when I played, although the GM expertly accounted for it without me even knowing it was catered for within the rules. We were House Knights charged with providing the Lords son with protection, as the old player and Knight I took this to mean even from himself and several times rectified his gaffs or bolstered his part in the adventure. He subsequently got quite a lot of Glory (comparatively) where I gained a lot of Experience checks. I also found a wife that support my interest in Intrigue and have unfortunately been unable to attend for a few session since... I hope they have had children by now :D

What I do is award, traits and passions that receive checks equal to thier number each year, having a 16+ does not auto award glory. If a skill or combat skill is impressive enough and witnessed in a way it would draw attention, that too get the glory award. At 20+ the trait, auto awards glory. If enough checks equal the religious or chivalry bonus of 100+, then 100 is added as a bonus.

This makes more sense and further rewards roleplay, as a knight must display his traits to achieve glory. Where a knight that just sits in his castle, gains little or no glory.

What I do is award, traits and passions that receive checks equal to thier number each year, having a 16+ does not auto award glory. If a skill or combat skill is impressive enough and witnessed in a way it would draw attention, that too get the glory award. At 20+ the trait, auto awards glory. If enough checks equal the religious or chivalry bonus of 100+, then 100 is added as a bonus.

This makes more sense and further rewards roleplay, as a knight must display his traits to achieve glory. Where a knight that just sits in his castle, gains little or no glory.

I am not sure how you apply this. Is it that if a person has for example a chaste 16 he needs 16 checks for a year to gain the glory bonus or only 1. It seems a bit hard to do for getting a 100 glory for chivalry and religious if you need a 100+ checks. Or do you need a check for all the traits associated to the bonus?

I see a problem with awarding glory from checked traits. Having the checks is already fairly important, I feel this might lead into shouting matches between players who gets most time in spotlight and most chances for checks.

If a person has a chaste 16 and earns a check for the year he will receive 16 glory. If a knight cuts down a saxon chieftain in view of his commander and crits, he receives a check as usual but also will gain glory for the skill check. The same Knight with 19 valor does not get glory at the end of the year unless his valor received a check that year. That how I do it.

Slight changes have been made to this house rule

Glory can be gained for traits less that 16 but only if the situation warrant it and thier is no longer and auto glory rewards without a check for that year from just having high traits. The 100 glory bonus from religious or chivalry applies normally even with no checks made if the knight has it.

With generational play it can be easy for a player to get his traits 'sorted' and not need to tinker much with them from then on.

To counteract this I've tried the following:

- after 510. chivalry bonus is 90 points
- after 530, chivalry bonus is 100 points.

After 510 only traits and passions of 18+ generate glory EXCEPT for traits on the right hand side which always retain their 16+ threshold (easier to get infamous than famous)
After 530 threshold goes to 20+

The rationale here is that the glory of the round table raises the bar as to what constitutes chivalry and heroic behaviour.

I also have two extra awards.

Best knight in the county and best knight in britain (the world?)

Total of chivalric traits plus glory/1000. High score wins.

The best knight of a county has 4 point armour of honour. The best knight in Britain has 5 points. These guys are expected to be champions and paragons.