In the rulebook it mentions about mistresses. They cost a pound and obviously can provide the knights with bastard offspring. However, in my game, the player knights always seem reluctant to spend money and rather beget their offspring on serving wenches and loose handmaidens. Is this something any of you have come across? How have you dealt with it? I was thinking of having some story hooks where a former wench is now struggling to raise the child and either seeks payment or drops the child off at the manor of the knight. I do have a house rule in my game that a additional wet nurse is needed for the third child, fifth and so on.

In the rulebook it mentions about mistresses. They cost a pound and obviously can provide the knights with bastard offspring. However, in my game, the player knights always seem reluctant to spend money and rather beget their offspring on serving wenches and loose handmaidens. Is this something any of you have come across? How have you dealt with it? I was thinking of having some story hooks where a former wench is now struggling to raise the child and either seeks payment or drops the child off at the manor of the knight. I do have a house rule in my game that a additional wet nurse is needed for the third child, fifth and so on.

If a bastard wants to claim an inheritance:

1. Has he been acknowledged by the father as heir?
If so, then his father will have to pay a whopping big fee to legitimize him
even then, other relatives will inevitably come forth with the claim that they are a better heir for the property

If not, he will have only a very thin claim
one that the king doesn't have to acknowledge at all
other relatives will inevitably come forth with the claim that they are a better heir for the property--and they are probably right!
other knights will come out of the woodwork and claim they are bastard heirs too
if he does convince the court that he is the actual and deserving heir, then he will have to pay a whopping extra fee to inherit

2. If the claimant's mother is a commoner
DOUBLE all that trouble from above

One of my fun things to do is to have several peasant women show up with their variously aged waifs, all seeking support
and then as they pass along the main routes of travel more women come forth...
remember
Everything has consequences

Just some thoughts, not about inheritiant.

Handmaidens are usually maids or damsels in waiting, so Nobility ne?
And the PK got atleast one pregnant, and does pay anything for her upkeep and that of the child?
The 2L per annual for a courtesan as per the book of Entourages maybe
Tha handmaid is shamed and sent off to a nunnery maybe, or somehow the kid is passed off as the wet nuses or some other intrige, what off the girl and her family. Would the PK have a brther or father or Uncle to answer to and explain how the maid got into her predicament. Maybe the Maid's Mistress would take her against the PK in this matter. Whose ear would she have to speak in.

Commoners have less clout so to speak but they would all talk without that 1L to keep then happy in their station.
Are they the PKs own commoners as that if repeated increase hate to ones landlord, and dry up the options as well.
Regardless of whose commoners, isnt the PK acting below his station if he gets the reputation for it when it comes to finding a wife for a Legitimate son. Will his enemies use them to shame his at some point if he ignores they exist.
Will the Priests be having "happy" conversations with the PK about it?

Most of my PK are faithful to their wives. None have chosen to seek pleasures out of wetlock. So I have not have to deal with it. But if the knights get a reputation of adulterers then yes introduce the angry father or uncle of a maiden or an angry family for a serving wench. As Greg says: everything has consequences.

the mistress is a "kept woman" thus the cost. she reserves herself for his pleasure and company by definition. the difference between the mistress and the courtesan is the courtesan is noble. now if they must sow their oats in loose girls fine. but i use this chart:

type of hay roll (difficulty and social class)----- chance of disease (on d6)---- type of disease (damage)
whore, loose, commoner (lust 14) 2+ black toggle 7d6
village maid commoner (lust 10) 4+ crotch burn 4d6
pious village maid (chaste 12) 5+ crotch itch 1d6
tart, loose handmaiden*, noble (lust 12) 3+ Sinner's lumps 6d6
puppy love, handmaiden*, noble (chaste 10) 6 virtues reminder 3d6
overtly betrothed**, handmaiden*, noble (chaste 14) 6 oath Breaker's shame 5d6

*roll 1d6: 1 no one speaks against the offense 2-3 she has a betrothed who takes action 4-5 male guardian takes action, 6 both
** automatically has a betrothed still roll d6 1 he won't act, 2-3 as above, 4-5 male guardian acts as well, 6 take it to someone with authority

as Kept women can afford access to healers they are only diseased on a 6 and carry the baggage of whatever situation the knight pull them from.

Handmaidens are usually maids or damsels in waiting, so Nobility ne?

Yes
which is to say: women with connections


And the PK got at least one pregnant, and does pay anything for her upkeep and that of the child?

If he does not marry her then he does not have to pay money, but he will pay in:
1. Enemies. The family of the girl will undoubtedly generate a Hatred for the player knight
It is likely that the friends of the family will too
If the family is important, then their lord will probably have a hatred too
2. Social Life. Anyone with an unmarried daughter or sister will be very cautious to interact with the character
They would probably have a Directed Trait of Suspicious towards him, at least


The 2L per annual for a courtesan as per the book of Entourages maybe

That is also the amount to support a wife and child


The handmaid is shamed and sent off to a nunnery maybe, or somehow the kid is passed off as the wet nurses or some other intrigue, what off the girl and her family. Would the PK have a brother or father or Uncle to answer to and explain how the maid got into her predicament. Maybe the Maid's Mistress would take her against the PK in this matter. Whose ear would she have to speak in.

Her family's ears. This is a very shameful thing and reduces the family's collective Honor.


Commoners have less clout so to speak

Do not underestimate the snobbery of class differences here!
Not less clout
NO clout


but they would all talk without that 1L to keep then happy in their station.
Are they the PKs own commoners as that if repeated increase hate to ones landlord, and dry up the options as well.

Good points


Regardless of whose commoners, isn't the PK acting below his station if he gets the reputation for it when it comes to finding a wife for a Legitimate son. Will his enemies use them to shame his at some point if he ignores they exist.

Regretably to the modern ethos, bonking and knocking up commoners is unlikely to mar a nobleman's reputation


Will the Priests be having "happy" conversations with the PK about it?

It depends entirely upon
1. What kind of priest he is. Not what sect, but what morality he practices.
2. What the knight's reaction is. If he reacts violently to the priest, it is unlikely that many othrs wo9uld approach on this topic

Thanks for all the ideas chaps. Food for thought there for sure.

Earlier in the campaign we did have a knight who slept with a handmaiden and got her pregnant. I ruled that when her father found out she accused the knight of rape. The knight demanded 'Trial by Combat' and died at the hands of the champion the girl's father put forward.

If a bastard wants to claim an inheritance:

1. Has he been acknowledged by the father as heir?
If so, then his father will have to pay a whopping big fee to legitimize him
even then, other relatives will inevitably come forth with the claim that they are a better heir for the property

Lets see... real life William the conqueror was born out of wedlock to a common woman, but was acknowledged as his heir by his father.He paid no large fee to be legitimized. Legendary... King Arthur is a bastard born of the rape of his mother Igraine by his father Uther Pendragon with the aid of Merlin, He was not acknowledged as heir by his father nor did he pay a large fee to be made legitimate. The post rape marriage of Igraine and Uther is meaningless, as under canon law adulterers can never legitimately marry each other, even if their spouses die, for Arthur Pendragon remained a bastard. Another point to consider how well did legitimate children and heirs fare. Arthur of Brittany was the legitimate heir of Richard I (nicked named the lionhearted); but Richard acknowledged his brother John as his heir, then switched back to Arthur and again switched back to John when Arthur was captured and raised by his liege lord and enemy the king of France. Philip Augustus (Richard's enemy and the king of France) supported the claim of the legitimate heir of Richard Arthur against John when Richard died, but later made peace with him and betrayed Arthur of Brittany. Anyone heir to a medieval anything was at risk of being disposed by a relative or even their liege lord.


If not, he will have only a very thin claim
one that the king doesn't have to acknowledge at all
other relatives will inevitably come forth with the claim that they are a better heir for the property--and they are probably right!

So Greg, that's what lances and swords are for- the real "trial by battle" ;)


other knights will come out of the woodwork and claim they are bastard heirs too
if he does convince the court that he is the actual and deserving heir, then he will have to pay a whopping extra fee to inherit

Greg did any other bastards come out claiming to be the rightful heirs of Normandy too- no, William the bastard/conqueror just had to defeat his uncle and out wit a dullard French king. Any heir had to pay a relief to the overlord of an honor or fee and they did not pay anything extra for being a bastard.


2. If the claimant's mother is a commoner
DOUBLE all that trouble from above

William the bastard did not get any extra trouble for being a bastard born of a common mistress.


One of my fun things to do is to have several peasant women show up with their variously aged waifs, all seeking support
and then as they pass along the main routes of travel more women come forth...
remember
Everything has consequences


Did any more bastard show up claiming to be the heir of Normandy...No! Even if they did it would be meaningless: bastard children were only children of their sire if he acknowledged them as his; they were only his heir if he acknowledged them as his heir; once the liege lord accepted a relief and the honor's knights proclaimed the heir as their liege lord it was all over for any other bastards unless they too had an army to fight with.

Lets see... real life William the conqueror was born out of wedlock to a common woman, but was acknowledged as his heir by his father.He paid no large fee to be legitimized. Legendary... King Arthur is a bastard born of the rape of his mother Igraine by his father Uther Pendragon with the aid of Merlin, He was not acknowledged as heir by his father nor did he pay a large fee to be made legitimate. The post rape marriage of Igraine and Uther is meaningless, as under canon law adulterers can never legitimately marry each other, even if their spouses die, for Arthur Pendragon remained a bastard.


Hey now... Arthur Pendragon was born in wedlock, acknowledged by Uther to be his. What is this adultery business you are talking about? Scurrilous rumormongering! :) More seriously, I don't think Arthur was ever considered illegitimate. It is not the conception that matters, but the birth.

You might be on a firmer ground with the adultery, but again, how many knew of Uther's sleeping with Igraine? I thought even Igraine didn't know the truth. Finally, how many churchmen would like to make this an issue with Uther? Arthur was born in wedlock, acknowledged by the king as his heir.

As for William, he did have a lot of problems rising from the fact of his illegitimacy and youth. He had to put down a baronial revolt. Finally, I think the biggest issue in his success was that the French King decided to back him against the other claimants. Had the French King decided differently, William would never have been able to keep his ducal title. The point here is that if William had been a legitimate, he would have had much easier time of it, and his father did try to prepare the ground for William's ascension to the ducal title.

Arthur of Brittany would have been more of a contender, had he been already an adult and unambiguously claimed as the heir by Richard. Like you pointed out, Richard vacillated between John and Arthur, possibly as a power play to keep everyone dangling. This being said, Arthur was a clear and present danger to John, some of the continental estates rallying to Arthur's claim in contrast to John's. Ultimately, the right of inheritance was decided by the might of arms.

In my campaign, illegitimate children might inherit, but the fathers would be well advised to prepare the ground as far as possible. Up to and including knighting the bastard if he is old enough and definitely trying to get the liege lord on board with this. As long as the liege lord is OK with the bastard inheriting, the other claimants have less of a leg to stand on.

Excellent points ,that don't change the facts that any inheritance was mainly a matter of politics and steel and not of hereditary right. brother often fought brothers, sons fathers and uncles nephews in the feudal age over any honor and wardens too often dispossessed their wards or even liege lords and vassals fought over who got an honor.

I am not sure what your point is here

The story of one of the most successful kings in history doesn't change the rules.
William the Bastard was exceptional in almost every way
Similarly for Arthur

As most Pendragon marriages are born of political necessities, love does not enter the equation. Both parties are expected to meet the marital obligations - including producing an heir, attending Courtly functions and events, etc. - but outside of that, the marriage can be as political as the arrangements that created it.

In our campaign, my character's wife rarely leaves the Earl's Court as she is always trying to advance her position (via the PK standing), so having a Mistress to keep the bed warm in the Manor is almost a necessity. Based on societal views of the time, it doesn't seem inappropriate or insulting - as would carousing with commoners, whores, or single maidens of the Court. Further, if the character didn't have a Mistress, he might be subject to ridicule and scorn by his peasants, Liege, and fellow Knights for being a cuckold.

Further, if the character didn't have a Mistress, he might be subject to ridicule and scorn by his peasants, Liege, and fellow Knights for being a cuckold.


Cuckold? I do not think that word means what you think it means..

A Cuckold is someone whose Wife has committed adultery. Not someone who is Chaste outside of his marriage.

He might be considered Old Fashioned, if the campaign is now in the Age of Romance and Courty Love, and he has no Amour, but ridicule and scorn..? Your game evidently does Vary..

I am not sure what your point is here

The story of one of the most successful kings in history doesn't change the rules.
William the Bastard was exceptional in almost every way
Similarly for Arthur


William the bastard was an Yngling and not at all exceptional for an Yngling... we had already conquered England several times and it was a great place to practice ones fencing with "Saxons" so was France, and both were fine places to raid for silver, gold, slave girls and fine fabrics as well as for younger sons to carve out dukedoms like Rollo or a county like my ancestor, also an Yngling. Ynglings whether Christian or Pagan were always the true sons of Oden/Othin.Wotan/Wodan both by blood and character and always good at the game of thrones.

Your assumption that bastardy was a bar to anything is just wrong, as is the idea that it was penalized by extra "fees/fines" that one needed to pay to be legitimized. Any bastard son acknowledged by his father was a member of his family and potentially an heir. Inheritance by primogeniture or any inheritance was only a customary right, but custom and real right were decided by the overlord of that holding who could try to have it set aside, just as Richard I did with Arthur of Brittany, but was ultimately decided by "homage" body of tenants who acted as a jury for any of their peers or their heirs and decided what the real custom was, just as are juries decide what the real law is in any modern case. They often set aside the customary heirs and at the lower level of a knight's fee/fief often set aside sales of a tenancy and returned the land to the customary heir or did whatever they pleased. On a little higher level it was the knights bachelor or in PD the vassal knights that determined the real heir to a fee. they could let the lord put away a customary heir, decided that the customary heir was not the real heir and grant the fee to someone else. Even whom was king was decided by whether by the peerage. Once anyone had been declared the heir by the body of tenants they were the heir and once a lord had accepted them by accepting their homage, relief and heriot they were the holders of that honor or fee.

Of course in game terms having a player have to practice politics to get his inheritance ( in PD terms Courtesy and Intrigue) or fight for it is a great adventure hook, so is having them join one of these succession feuds as knights aiding whomever they think is in the right or whomever has paid them the most for their aid. These feuds also have the advantage of being entirely part of real medieval culture. I'll give you a couple for examples of these. Charles Martel was a bastard son just like William the bastard. to become mayor of the Merovingian Palace he had to defeat the customary heir and his stepmother to become heir to that office. His son Pepin the short also had no trouble dethroning the last Merovingian Childeric III and having his de facto kingship becoming a de jure one as well.

Further, if the character didn't have a Mistress, he might be subject to ridicule and scorn by his peasants, Liege, and fellow Knights for being a cuckold.


Cuckold? I do not think that word means what you think it means..

A Cuckold is someone whose Wife has committed adultery. Not someone who is Chaste outside of his marriage.

He might be considered Old Fashioned, if the campaign is now in the Age of Romance and Courty Love, and he has no Amour, but ridicule and scorn..? Your game evidently does Vary..


I am aware of the historical meaning of the word, as well as the modern fetish it describes. In this case, it was being used as slang as it is often applied where I work / game, and under that condition I should have used a qualifier.

As the PK believes his standing in Court is dictated by his actions and not the intrigue, he scorns attempting to further himself by whispering about the other members of the Court. This is in direct opposition to his wife who actively rumor mongers in hopes of improving her husbands standing in order to raise his political standing, and thereby grant a similar rise to her father and brothers. She is very Machiavellian and this has caused no end of rumors about her own infidelity and desire for power - up to and including the suggestion that she intends to have the PK assassinated if a male heir is born. The PK can not seek divorce, nor is he willing to stoop to palace intrigue to defend himself, and "getting his wife in line" will cause a rift with her family and jeopardize the peace the Earl has worked so hard to forge. Thus, having a professional Mistress at the Manor provides an honorable foil against the situation - he is master of his own domain, even if he is not master of his marriage.

Thus being Chaste may only fuel the rumors that the wife is truly in charge and the PK is unable / unwilling to put an end to her machinations. While being "Old Fashioned" would imply that he is willing to force the issue of the male / female roles in the marriage and dictate that she take her place in the Manor as Steward and dutifully obey her husband.

And yes, our game does vary - it is full of military personnel who are well versed in The Prince and Art of War, so politics does play a HUGE role in our game, even if the PK tries to eschew them.

William the bastard was an Yngling and not at all exceptional for an Yngling... we had already conquered England several times and it was a great place to practice ones fencing with "Saxons" so was France, and both were fine places to raid for silver, gold, slave girls and fine fabrics as well as for younger sons to carve out dukedoms like Rollo or a county like my ancestor, also an Yngling. Ynglings whether Christian or Pagan were always the true sons of Oden/Othin.Wotan/Wodan both by blood and character and always good at the game of thrones.

Your credibility slips when you stretch Yngling to include Normans
I am well aware of who the Ynglings were
And I am well versed in Scandinavian, Normal and English history


Your assumption that bastardy was a bar to anything is just wrong, as is the idea that it was penalized by extra "fees/fines" that one needed to pay to be legitimized.

Let's get into a citing sources contest then


Any bastard son acknowledged by his father was a member of his family and potentially an heir.

I disagree on the blanket statement
However, understand that I fully encourage Your Pendragon May Vary, and I often slide past the rules myself


Inheritance by primogeniture or any inheritance was only a customary right, but custom and real right were decided by the overlord of that holding who could try to have it set aside, just as Richard I did with Arthur of Brittany, but was ultimately decided by "homage" body of tenants who acted as a jury for any of their peers or their heirs and decided what the real custom was, just as are juries decide what the real law is in any modern case.

Of course, that is what the escheat was about, and diem clausit extremum and the jury's inquisition post mortem


Of course in game terms having a player have to practice politics to get his inheritance ( in PD terms Courtesy and Intrigue) or fight for it is a great adventure hook, so is having them join one of these succession feuds as knights aiding whomever they think is in the right or whomever has paid them the most for their aid. These feuds also have the advantage of being entirely part of real medieval culture. I'll give you a couple for examples of these. Charles Martel was a bastard son just like William the bastard. to become mayor of the Merovingian Palace he had to defeat the customary heir and his stepmother to become heir to that office. His son Pepin the short also had no trouble dethroning the last Merovingian Childeric III and having his de facto kingship becoming a de jure one as well.

In truth, the law varied across time and space, and players ought to go with whatever follow the MGF rule (Maximum Game Fun)

Further, if the character didn't have a Mistress, he might be subject to ridicule and scorn by his peasants, Liege, and fellow Knights for being a cuckold.


Cuckold? I do not think that word means what you think it means..

A Cuckold is someone whose Wife has committed adultery. Not someone who is Chaste outside of his marriage.

He might be considered Old Fashioned, if the campaign is now in the Age of Romance and Courty Love, and he has no Amour, but ridicule and scorn..? Your game evidently does Vary..


I am aware of the historical meaning of the word, as well as the modern fetish it describes. In this case, it was being used as slang as it is often applied where I work / game, and under that condition I should have used a qualifier.

As the PK believes his standing in Court is dictated by his actions and not the intrigue, he scorns attempting to further himself by whispering about the other members of the Court. This is in direct opposition to his wife who actively rumor mongers in hopes of improving her husbands standing in order to raise his political standing, and thereby grant a similar rise to her father and brothers. She is very Machiavellian and this has caused no end of rumors about her own infidelity and desire for power - up to and including the suggestion that she intends to have the PK assassinated if a male heir is born. The PK can not seek divorce, nor is he willing to stoop to palace intrigue to defend himself, and "getting his wife in line" will cause a rift with her family and jeopardize the peace the Earl has worked so hard to forge. Thus, having a professional Mistress at the Manor provides an honorable foil against the situation - he is master of his own domain, even if he is not master of his marriage.

Thus being Chaste may only fuel the rumors that the wife is truly in charge and the PK is unable / unwilling to put an end to her machinations. While being "Old Fashioned" would imply that he is willing to force the issue of the male / female roles in the marriage and dictate that she take her place in the Manor as Steward and dutifully obey her husband.

And yes, our game does vary - it is full of military personnel who are well versed in The Prince and Art of War, so politics does play a HUGE role in our game, even if the PK tries to eschew them.


Aethling this PC is indeed unfortunate to have a scheming arbitrary wife and he deserves scorn for tolerating a woman you slanders and scheme against decent knight, damaging both her victims honor, her own honor (not that she has any) an even that of her husband. that PC is just too meek and humble. A wife so vile likely will cuckold him and having a mistress should not help his reputation any. If also cruel or her lover is she may will plot that PC's death.

Here is how my PC or sir Gawaine or any brave (AKA vindictive 16+) knight would handle such a woman. Take her to a deep lake with a heavy stoned tied to her neck. tell her "Wife if you escape both death and hell, you'll have a chance to repent and reform, if you don't we'll do this again with your hands tied as well. Your life at court is finished in either case". Then shove the stone off the boat into the lake and push her out. If she survives and agrees to reform, she goes into a locked chamber where she'll have no chance to cuckold one or scheme against me or other decent knights. Should she produce a male heir and fail to reform she'll be allowed to retire to a convent for the rest of her life as a nun, otherwise to the lake again with hands tied or one could just accuse her of adultery and then watch others hang her after you kill her lover in trial by battle of course she could always ask for trial by ordeal, but that would just mean she would do the stone tied to her neck and a heavy stone and with her hands bound to start with ;)

Cuckold?


I am aware of the historical meaning of the word, as well as the modern fetish it describes. In this case, it was being used as slang as it is often applied where I work / game, and under that condition I should have used a qualifier.

-Snip-

And yes, our game does vary - it is full of military personnel who are well versed in The Prince and Art of War, so politics does play a HUGE role in our game, even if the PK tries to eschew them.


Given we are discusing a medievally inspired game, not a kink/fetish one, it might help avoid confusion if you used the historic meaning of the word, rather than the slang one. there are quie a few members of this board for whom English is not their first language.

I believe that Machiavelli and Sun Tzu are poor sources of inspiration for the game as intended. After Mallory, I think Villehardouin, de Joinville, Froissart and Ibn Munqidh are far better.

However, from the description of your game, (YPMV for MGF, no judgement just an observation) I don't think there is much to productively discuss.

One of the Arthurian traditions had Uther dragging a knight behind a cart for being a cuckold. I found this an astonishing account, and the only sense I could make of it is that these "manly men" had such contempt for men that had so little control over their women that they were not only treated said cuckolds with scorn, but actually publicly humiliated and tortured them!


T.

Not sure if this is the place to ask whether I should have started another thread but...

In our game a player has asked if his 2 children could be swapped in game, his wife produced a daughter and he rolled an illegitimate son to a commoner. He wondered if this sort of thing would/could have happened.

I am quite happy for him to swap the children around as there have been only 2 boys born so far and it also gives me a story hook I may use later on in the campaign when they move on to playing their off-spring.

Any comments gratefully received :)

I think you should say no. He's trying to cheat in the game with permission, just as his character is cheating on his wife. this could all be just a test for even more cheating- the camel should always get its nose kicked when it tries to stick its nose inside the tent - if you don't the whole camel could be coming in soon.

Come on, no woman would put up with switching her child for another child!

I think you should say no.I second that. But for a different reason. A bastard son ist real great story content, specially if the only legal children are girls. You may let the player struggle with hard decicions whether he acknowledge the boy as his son or not. IF he accept him, you may put incursions from the family of the wife in play. And the same may come up a second time when it comes to inheritance. I would escalate things AFTER he announces the boy as his son publicly by give him a legal son (by pure GMs fiat) afterwards.
If he does NOT accept the bastard, you get a NPC whith very great potential for stressing the PK (no matter if it is still the father or already the next generation in play) when the boy is in adult age. It could become a great antagonist.

In my view a swap would kill all this marvelous plot devices. So I wouldn't recomend this.

One of the Arthurian traditions had Uther dragging a knight behind a cart for being a cuckold.
MUCH SNIPPAGEGreetings to all!
Taliesin, if you recall it, would you cite your source on this. I've not seen it and I'm rather intrigued!

Thanks
chasing perfection catches excellence

I think you should say no. He's trying to cheat in the game with permission, just as his character is cheating on his wife. this could all be just a test for even more cheating- the camel should always get its nose kicked when it tries to stick its nose inside the tent - if you don't the whole camel could be coming in soon.

Come on, no woman would put up with switching her child for another child!


I can see your point, but I think he is nefarious enough to have the mothers "die" in child-birth like his first wife had done (he waited a year before re-marrying). Of course, if he goes along with this train of thought he may have to kill off others too, the Preist, the "midwife" (not sure of the correct term for the period) and any house staff who bore witness, then when he thinks he has thought of everybody I am sure I can think of someone else who knows what is going on





I think you should say no.I second that. But for a different reason. A bastard son ist real great story content, specially if the only legal children are girls. You may let the player struggle with hard decicions whether he acknowledge the boy as his son or not. IF he accept him, you may put incursions from the family of the wife in play. And the same may come up a second time when it comes to inheritance. I would escalate things AFTER he announces the boy as his son publicly by give him a legal son (by pure GMs fiat) afterwards.
If he does NOT accept the bastard, you get a NPC whith very great potential for stressing the PK (no matter if it is still the father or already the next generation in play) when the boy is in adult age. It could become a great antagonist.

In my view a swap would kill all this marvelous plot devices. So I wouldn't recomend this.


All those things are still possible if he goes ahead with it, as GM I am loathe to say an outright no. I would rather listen to all his thoughts, especially if done through roleplaying an NPC, and then advise him of some of the consequences of those actions, not all of course, as who could possibly foresee all the consequences. By allowing him to make the decision he will feel more in control of his destiny, which as we all know is codswallop (http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/codswallop?q=codswallop) :D

Thank-you both for the feedback though there are things that I hadnt considered at all, I was hoping that the family side of things wasnt going to throw up any difficulties so early on, especially as I try to get the tone right. My difficulty lies in bringing the Gossip to life, I had for the first few sessions just simply read that section and passed it off as overheard at the banquets but this last time I used PK wifes and dalliances as the source, it seems a lot more realistic and didnt take much more time to run through.

Take care Dal

Dalfort, another thing to consider is that the Pendragon system of having the children pop up in the Winter Phase is simply a book-keeping convenience. Even if we are to believe that the knights do most of their shagging during winter months and early spring before the Court, there is still likely to be at least a few months variance as to the actual birthdays of the babies. What are the odds that the bastard boy and the legitimate daughter are born close enough in time to be switched?

Killing your wife, the midwife and the Priest in cold blood is good for what? -10 Honor, and definitely up Cruel and Deceitful as well. However, if he has had time to plan for this, and assuming that the bastard boy did born first rather than a couple of weeks later, which would throw a rather big wrench to this whole switching thing, then he might be able to get the cooperation of the Priest and the Midwife to do the switch. Especially if he doesn't have any legitimate sons. Then, the cooperation of those involved already secured in advance, he can have his bastard son brought to a nearby room (claim the lover is a potential nursemaid with her newborn daughter), and then do the switcheroo. The mother probably doesn't get to see the baby right away, especially if the birth has been hard, and there would be enough time to switch one baby for the other.

Granted, that leaves him at the mercy of potential blackmail plots later on, or his bastard son's right challenged by a fair young maiden down the road, armed with the testimony of an aging priest now fearing Hellfire for his false conduct, and what red-blooded knight wouldn't get all hot and bothered about the idea of helping a pretty young maiden reclaim her inheritance and then marrying her helper?

That is definitely more to my thinking, let him do it and give some hefty trait consequences out (automatic 1 on all "Evil" traits and a check is what I was thinking, dependant on how far he goes with it).

As for the timing of things I think I would roll 2 d12's and if they matched then they are close enough (I used to use I d12 for month, a d4 for the week of the month d8 reroll 8 for the day to find my D&D characters birthdays). Like I said I wouldnt do it for my characters but the player (my RL eldest son) asked about it, whether he has second thoughts before we play again on Friday we will have to see :) but it will be interesting to find out either way.

He has a legitimate Daughter from his first wife who has been ill since birth, until this latest winter phase after he secured a Potion (and visit... which I didnt give Glory for now I think about it!) from Merlin after the last adventure.

Thanks for your ideas, its great having a sounding board without talking to my player and giving too much away. My D&D was awful for having a lot of background that was unused, or that player knew about that their character couldnt, luckily most of my players are good enough roleplayers to not overtly use it :)