In the Book of the Manor, the "enhancement" category of manorial improvements includes a mechanic whereby an enhancement grants a roll in order to grant a check. However, I cannot find the mechanics for this roll. What kind of roll is this supposed to be?

Any help here would be greatly appreciated.

I think you just roll said trait/skill. If successful, you get to make and experience roll to see if it goes up.

Ah okay. Sounds reasonable. Just felt a bit odd that you roll to make a check to make a roll :)

I guess it's a "half check", kind of.

Just like Eothar said. Note that you need to roll the same or under the skill to get the check, but then roll over it or a 20 to raise it in the experience rolling of Winter Phase.

Also, we tweaked the Jousting List to work exactly the opposite: a failed Lance roll gives you a check. The new logic being that it is very helpful for a novice, but next to useless to a champion. Whereas it makes sense that the hunting lodge would be most utilized by an enthusiastic hunter, making him all the more inclined to spend his hours hunting, rather than help a guy not that much into hunting in the first place. So the regular rules were fine for us in that case.

Just like Eothar said. Note that you need to roll the same or under the skill to get the check, but then roll over it or a 20 to raise it in the experience rolling of Winter Phase.

This is actually Greg's best design. It tried to keep skill inflation down when one has little and at the same time be realistic in that experience is the fruit of failure not success. That was a great design when everyone else was treating experience like it was school, with success leading to more success - LOL, success is just the repetition of what one already knows or execution of existing skills.


Also, we tweaked the Jousting List to work exactly the opposite: a failed Lance roll gives you a check. The new logic being that it is very helpful for a novice, but next to useless to a champion. Whereas it makes sense that the hunting lodge would be most utilized by an enthusiastic hunter, making him all the more inclined to spend his hours hunting, rather than help a guy not that much into hunting in the first place. So the regular rules were fine for us in that case.


This is odd as the Lance skill is so easy to get to 15. Would you expand on your explanation?

Also, we tweaked the Jousting List to work exactly the opposite: a failed Lance roll gives you a check. The new logic being that it is very helpful for a novice, but next to useless to a champion. Whereas it makes sense that the hunting lodge would be most utilized by an enthusiastic hunter, making him all the more inclined to spend his hours hunting, rather than help a guy not that much into hunting in the first place. So the regular rules were fine for us in that case.

This is odd as the Lance skill is so easy to get to 15. Would you expand on your explanation?


Gladly.

The argument is this: the Jousting List is mainly the training paraphernalia to LEARN how to Joust. Like that thing that spins around and whacks you one with a sandbag. An experienced Jouster already knows how to deal with those things, so he won't get much benefit from the Jousting Lists. Thus, it is mostly useful for people with 'poor' Lance Skills (like 10) and less so for people with Lance 15+. The way experienced Jousters learn more is by attending tournaments. Hence, if you have Jousting Lists, you'll need to FAIL in your Lance skill to gain a check. That means you made a mistake (had a fault on your technique) that the training equipment helped to fix -> you learn something new. [Fail in skill -> get a check -> roll over the skill -> get an increase]

With a hunting lodge, the idea is that it makes it more convenient to indulge in your hunting hobby. Thus, if you are a passionate hunter (high skill), then it makes sense that you'd do more hunting from your lodge -> success in your skill means you did more hunting that year -> get a check. Whereas if you are a crappy hunter, having a lodge in the woods is not going to help you become a better one. [Regular rules: Succeed in skill -> get a check -> roll over the skill -> get an increase]

Although I can follow your reasoning I like to offer a counter: A Jousting list is meant to learn new tricks and techniques. An experienced jouster can use the list to try out new ideas and 'play' with his skill. Since he has a lot of experience he can quickly learn new trick (roll for his skill successful). But since he is already experienced it is doubtful that a new trick will aid him in an actual joust (roll the check successful).

In this case you can use the normal rules.

Although I can follow your reasoning I like to offer a counter: A Jousting list is meant to learn new tricks and techniques.


Respectfully, I disagree. :) Someone with poor skill would benefit more from the chance to practice, and new tricks are learned in the tournament. But to each his own. :)

I see you use two different basis of how you come to the rules you use and for me they are contradictory (or at least you do not use some in the other)

Jousting list:
- You learn from your mistakes.
- Someone who built a jousting list will use it frequently.
so you assume everyone uses the list as frequently. And only those who are not good at jousting can learn from it.

Hunting lodge:
- You learn by doing. So to become a good hunter you must do it.
- Someone who already knows a lot
- A high skill indicates a person who likes to hunt.
Here you assume that the skill determines how often a person uses the lodge and thus has a chance to learn something.

Both may be true. But as I said it feels contradictory to me.

The difference is that Hunting is an activity, filled with new challenges. The Jousting Lists are more passive, no surprises, no great challenges. You would need a person to joust with, preferably many of them. That sounds more like a tournament for me.

In any case, it is simply our houserule. You certainly are free to do as you please in your campaign.

The difference is that Hunting is an activity, filled with new challenges. The Jousting Lists are more passive, no surprises, no great challenges. You would need a person to joust with, preferably many of them. That sounds more like a tournament for me.


I think you are mistaken. A jousting list is not some kind of mechanical contraption designed to help you learn the basics of jousting. It is the ground on which knights can joust with each other and a place for the spectators to watch. Like this one: https://d1ij7zv8zivhs3.cloudfront.net/assets/33622/lightbox/62558c65f30fa063d47dd5e9559aa564.jpg?1276892346

Quintain is what you were thinking of?

That's the thing, thank you, Vasious.

Alright, now that I am reunited with my BotM again... Jousting List is described as 'a patch of ground and the equipment to practice jousting'. Mind you, it is quite overpowered as enhancements go: it costs a pittance, it doesn't have any annual maintenance and it gives a straight Check to Lance. Mind you, at least in our Campaign it is extremely easy to get a check to Lance; just participate in a tournament and you are almost certain to get one. In any case, the emphasis on training equipment and the lack of any instructor / sparring opponent made me decide on my ruling. YPMV.

Without a doubt, the Jousting List needs a balance pass. It is considered the most automatic get for any knight in my campaign. What it offers at that cost makes it impossible to pass up. I'd recommend in the Book of the Estate that its benefit should be toned down a bit.

Without a doubt, the Jousting List needs a balance pass. It is considered the most automatic get for any knight in my campaign. What it offers at that cost makes it impossible to pass up. I'd recommend in the Book of the Estate that its benefit should be toned down a bit.

Other folks claim the beehive is the most important and first gotten
The thing about the List is that knights are almost always going to get a check on their Lance anyway
Thus the fact that this gives them a check is not that big a deal

Yeah, the apiary is another conspicuously good manorial enhancement.

Interesting remark about knights usually getting a check to Lance anyway. I haven't really found that to be the case in my own GPC. If I understand the rules correctly, a knight would need to crit on his Lance skill to get a check, unless the story warranted it otherwise. However, in my experience most battles are fought predominantly with swords, after the opening lance charge. If the knights are very lucky, they might get other lance charges in the same battle, but it's tricky to pull that off.

Now, we're playing before tournaments have come into being so perhaps that's the reason I don't see much use of the lance in my game, at least when compared to other combat skills.

Interesting remark about knights usually getting a check to Lance anyway.


My rule of thumb when it comes to checks is pretty much that if a knight is in a real battle with a lance or participates in a tournament during the year, he gets a check in Lance whether he rolled a crit or not. I am also given to rewarding checks to things like Faerie Lore when they interact with faerie creatures, even if they wouldn't roll even successes. To show the exposure and learning from mistakes. (Speaking of that latter, we are also awarding experience checks for fumbles.) Participating in a battle as the leader is always good for a Battle check, and usually for a follower as well, if it is a bigger battle. Horsemanship checks are common as well, when the knights travel for weeks to and fro on horseback. Participating at Court is usually good for Courtesy and some other courtly skill, like Intrigue or Orate. I try to be generous with skill checks: for instance, I tend to hand out weapon checks if the PK uses a weapon in a real fight. Fighting against a peasant for a smack with a dagger is not enough, but stabbing a hag immune to swords with a spear might very well be.

In the end, I try to ensure that the knights have around 8 - 10 skill checks by the end of each year, depending of course how busy the year has been. If they haven't gotten enough experience checks 'on stage' then I usually ask for suggestions on what skills they would like to have experience checks on, with some kind of justification ('Well, I met a lot of other knights at Pentecost Tournament, so a Heraldry check?').

I tend to be a little bit more strict with my checks, I guess. The ruels seem to leave it largely to teh GM's preference, and I think that's as it should be.

I admit, I'm very glad of that now that I just read for the first time the rules for creating a PK son character, which allow the new knight to inherit any of the father's traits and passios that the player wishes. That's quite powerful, since Passions at 20 or higher can neither fail nor fumble without modification and traits starting very high means new PKs will be able to start with religious, chivalric, and similar bonuses right form the start, or soon afterward.

At least I think that's how it works. But anyway, yeah, in a multi-generational game I'm inclined toward being consservative since some of this stuff (though not skills) passes directly on.

I had a question on the BotM Granted Rolls. Are they required or not? In the book on page 28 it says "Roll for [x] indicates that a roll may be made", which, to me, signifies a choice. But when you look at the Coneygarth, it mentions "hence the Trait rolls required."

The rules lawyer in me sees the page 28 description as "these are optional", but the "spirit of the law" person in me sees that if they're optional you'd never roll for Cowardly/Lustful if you were avoiding improving those Traits.

I had a question on the BotM Granted Rolls. Are they required or not? In the book on page 28 it says "Roll for [x] indicates that a roll may be made",

Page 21, in my version?

They are mandatory. The point is that you will have to succeed in the roll to get an experience check in the trait, usually. Also, note that BotE made away with much of this rolling mechanism, and instead is handing out checks straight away. Especially in Coneygarth's case, those Cowardly checks are there explicitly to balance the gold mine that Investment otherwise would be.