There is a story told of the Covenanters in 17th century Scotland. In those days, it was illegal for nonconformists (those outside the Anglican church) to celebrate the Eucharist. One day a Covenanter girl was on her way to a secret Eucharist, when she turned the corner and was face-to-face with English soldiers. They asked where she was going and she did not want to lie but she didn't want to be killed or risk the lives of her fellow Covenanters. She answered them, "My elder Brother has died, and I go to hear the reading of His will." The soldiers let her pass.

Now, that seems like a critical to me, but would you rule that for Honest or Deceitful?

There is a story told of the Covenanters in 17th century Scotland. In those days, it was illegal for nonconformists (those outside the Anglican church) to celebrate the Eucharist. One day a Covenanter girl was on her way to a secret Eucharist, when she turned the corner and was face-to-face with English soldiers. They asked where she was going and she did not want to lie but she didn't want to be killed or risk the lives of her fellow Covenanters. She answered them, "My elder Brother has died, and I go to hear the reading of His will." The soldiers let her pass.

Now, that seems like a critical to me, but would you rule that for Honest or Deceitful?


This I am sad to say is a Deceitful check on the making. Even though she told the truth, we need to look at the intent and that was to deceit the soldiers. It could be tempered with a Loyalty(Group) check

I would say the same. Deceitful and Loyalty(Group) check. The intent is to deceive in order to save the group.

I really appreciate the feedback on this. Yeah, I agree she is definitely being deceitful - at the same time not being completely dishonest. I just think it brings up that aspect of honesty/deceitfulness. If you had a 20 Honesty, would you automatically reveal all of Arthur's secret plans to the Saxons? She was definitely trying to deceive, but she was also actively avoiding outright lying. In this situation, I think the deceitfulness is a virtue, rather than the vice it is usually perceived as being.

Bringing up Loyalty (Group) was a very good insight here. I wonder if a character could have a directed trait for this? Deceitful (Saxons), maybe? What do you think of that?

I really appreciate the feedback on this. Yeah, I agree she is definitely being deceitful - at the same time not being completely dishonest.

Out of curiosity, how it is at all not dishonest?


I just think it brings up that aspect of honesty/deceitfulness. If you had a 20 Honesty, would you automatically reveal all of Arthur's secret plans to the Saxons?

You can try not to
Make an opposed roll of Loyalty (Arthur) and Honesty
If that failed, lost a point of Honesty and try Honesty versus Honor
if that failed, lose a point of Honesty and try Honesty versus... whatever the GM thinks might be right
However, at some point I (as GM) would require an opposed roll of the PCs Dishonesty versus the guard's Honesty, whereupon a win by the Saxon = he knows the PC is lying


She was definitely trying to deceive, but she was also actively avoiding outright lying. In this situation, I think the deceitfulness is a virtue, rather than the vice it is usually perceived as being.

Yep, a virtue all right. Check Dishonest.


Bringing up Loyalty (Group) was a very good insight here. I wonder if a character could have a directed trait for this?

I believe this is suggested int he core rules


Deceitful (Saxons), maybe? What do you think of that?

It'd be a directed Trait
But unnecessary if he has a Hate Saxons, or a Loyalty (Arthur) to oppose his Honest habits

Out of curiosity, how it is at all not dishonest?

In the sense that it is "technically" true. Christ is described as the "firstborn among many brothers" = her elder brother. He died on the cross = has died. Scripture is supposed to be the revelation of the will of God = go to hear the reading of his will. She wasn't 100% honest (didn't reveal the location of the secret meeting) but she didn't lie.


However, at some point I (as GM) would require an opposed roll of the PCs Dishonesty versus the guard's Honesty, whereupon a win by the Saxon = he knows the PC is lying

Excellent. When I was thinking about a directed trait for this, I wasn't thinking about passions, but - of course - you are right. That mechanic is already there. Good stuff.

the foremost expert on lies and Deception Dr. Paul Ekman classifies a lie as any deception. any attempt to knowingly mislead a receiver though false or deliberately omitted information when the receiver is unwilling to be deceived (paraphrased) i'm An Interpersonal/Applied persuasion major and usually am wise to my player attempt to "spin" there actions to a trait they prefer. Ekman definition is my bread and butter both in and out of game for honesty vs deceit.

Ah. You wish the discussion the letter of the law and the intend of the law. As you said, from a certain point of view she tells the truth. But she did it to deceive the other. Deceitfulness is not only lying. Deceit is having the other think or do something he would not do if he knows the truth. Ekman's classification is a good one.

In the case of the honest knight of Arthur vs the Saxon: The only way to be honest and not to betray the king would be to keep silent and not answer questions. If he misdirects them then it is deceit, if he tells them the truth it is disloyalty to Arthur.

Btw this is just the thing that I like about the game. There is no clear line of good vs bad. Every action has consequences and in some cases even deceit can be a virtue.

Btw this is just the thing that I like about the game. There is no clear line of good vs bad. Every action has consequences and in some cases even deceit can be a virtue.

Exactly! And that's why I posted the question. This game makes you think!

I hope that more parents will play it with their children. Not only is it educational to history and literature, but it also helps them think about consequences of actions. Great stuff. Thank you, Greg!