The BOOK OF THE ESTATE is now available on DriveThruRPG!

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/115353/Book-of-the-Estate

Right now we only have the downloadable PDF version up there, but the POD versions are soon to come. The publisher will offer a discount on the POD versions so that you end up paying the bundle price if you buy the PDF now.

Go get it, and let's talk about it here!


Best,


T.

Fantastic news!

Cool Perfect timing

*follows the link*

Downloading now. Can't wait to read it.

Come back after you've skimmed through and give us your first impressions. We love feedback!


T.

I like it. I didn't really notice the new format with BoB, but here it really is great with the red text helping to digest the main text.

I plan to stick with the Book of Manor while my PKs are vassal knights, but now I'm prepared if they're granted estates (and I appreciate that the book has suggestions for general events that could lead to such, as well as specific events occurring during the course of the GPC).

Fortifications do look awfully cheap, particularly the motte and bailey, which looks like it costs less than the sum of its parts.

I feel really bad and maybe it's due to being Monday. But I'm not real impressed...

ON A QUICK READ
I guess I’m disappointed. Hopefully this will change as I get a chance to read it more thoroughly. But it was very confusing to read, calculations strewn about in blocks of text, formulas and concepts not very well-explained or multiple times. Lots of “if this were real, but it’s not, but here are the numbers.”

There appears to be a significant disconnect between a simplified economic system and something more realistic. Almost as if there were two authors, one creating a “hard” economic system and the other trying to make it streamlined. This book seems incomplete. Half-finished, unfortunately, and stuck somewhere between Harn and Book of the Manor.

It’s Monday so maybe I’m crabby. I love the detail that is provided but I just can’t figure out which detail is for use in-game and which is just fluff. That detail which does exist is sorely lacking in places where it should be detailed. For example, there is nothing about having vassal knights and yet I know I owe my farrier an extra libram. Which I actually don’t owe him because its already included in my budget.

Hopefully a more careful read will show that this opinion is uninformed.

Here are some specific items that cause concern, questions or just need minor corrections:

EARLY PHASE 485-518
This is on the title page… does this mean that there will be another one?
“This book presents a less detailed but
much faster economic system that is
more appropriate to the early phase
of the great pendragon campaign.”

NO EXPANSION OF MILITARY
For me, the entire fun of having a sizable estate would be to have that Field Army… but there is little to no discussion of it. The only place to find the cost for military personnel is to extrapolate it from the example household lists. I realize that the game is about knights but I think having 20-30 men-at-arms could make for interesting times. It deserves attention.

NO DISCUSSION OF VASSAL KNIGHTS
Again, the importance of vassals is hardly touched on. What about gifts to vassal knights? Granting manors to obtain their services, using marriage as a tool to secure loyalty? Pages 25-26 are about all we see.

This seems a rather large omission in that we ignore the field army ostensibly because it’s a game about knights. But we also ignore knights…

HUNDRED MOOT/COURT
Lots of talk about income from Hundred Moots but no discussion or tables for cases that may come before the knight? This is a rather significant post and, if it’s going to be incorporated into the game, deserves some attention.

SHERIFFS
Okay, so now we have Sheriffs. Very cool! That changes lots of things. What happens to them during the Anarchy? How does one create that Office? Or become that office? They now have castles which were occupied by other nobles in most games. Again, a significant change which is glossed over. Seems like a logical post for a Player Character, so it might be important to discuss it? Granted, it may come out in the Book of Uther but we get no real information here.

CHANGING NAMES (Likely personal opinion)
In theory, this sounded like a good idea. But for someone who is not an Arthurian scholar, you have just made my life that much more difficult. And apparently, all my pretty colored maps are obsolete. Now there are different names for every location. The GPC is already an incredible body of work that requires careful reading. But now players and GMs will be using two different lexicons for the geography and, possibly, different maps. Every published material is now out-of-date and confusion will continue to mount as new products come out under this scheme.

It is mentioned that this is not England but the land of the Pendragons. So why change the names then? Now future maps won’t coincide with published maps, Stafford’s excellent political list is out of date, and people like me are back at square one.

Historical accuracy is not a feature for me since the game is about knights in Pendragon’s Britain. Consistency is.

MARLBOROUGH v. GENTIAN
Perfect example. What the heck is Marlborough? Is it a County? Is it a Barony?
In the Pendragon 5th, Marlboro is a Barony north of Salisbury.
In the GPC, Marlborough is a County north of Salisbury. It does not include Calne.
In Stafford's Political List, Marlborough is a County north of Salisbury.
Now, there is no such thing. We have Gentrian County with different boundaries and towns… (like Calne!)

SURVIVAL TABLES (p22)
Survival tables are confusing with the status of War, Famine etc. It is not explained in advance that certain status descriptions (Famine, War etc) are applied to each year from the start. These should be clearly labeled as being applied first. The first modifier listed assumes you know this.

HOUSEHOLD BONUS INCOME TABLES
p.30, Bonus income for Officers/Household: this list appears to be incomplete. My version has officers working for free in more powerful estates. Almost no one receives bonus income except in a 10 Libram Estate. Likely a formatting issue in the table.

TABLE 3.6 and 3.7
Income AND Lots, these are not identified properly as the same thing. Tables give impression that they are different things. This is corrected on the next page. Or is it. I’m confused… damage occurs in 10% of total income but it only repairs at 1 libram a year?

HANTONNE MANOR (p69)
No mention of it being overrun by Saxons. Mentioned in the next estate entry though that Saxons will overrun it.

NEW SKILLS
I like the Diplomacy skill but it tends to downplay Courtesy in this role.

VILLAGES, TOWNS AND CITIES
No values attached to specific communities. Sure I can calculate damage from a raid but what if one of my hamlets is conquered... how does that affect my income? How many villages per estate? Hamlets? Towns? It appears to just be up to me...

I was hoping for far more information on the control, administration and improvement of villages, towns and markets. At a minimum, features within an estate should have a value attached to them. This seems like a major oversight.

CREATING A NEW ESTATE
Badly laid out. Do I just make up properties and attach income to them? When do I add market/trade bonuses? It appears that I need to use percentiles of Assize Rent but then I need to figure out how to come up with that number or the kind of components… there’s no table for that or guidelines. I reread the part about Assize rent but that just tells me that all land has an agreed upon value.

Okay, I’m pretty confused here. I have full confidence I can wing it by looking at the other Estates. But should I have to? Apparently, I have to start at page 1 again and reread this thing...

CONTRADICTIONS
There appear to be contradictions or opposing authors/writing within the document. Here is one example of the contradictions within the document:


P34--The apparent opportunity to turn a profit
through the armory is illusory. Iron is rare, sometimes
even rationed, and the weapon-maker is
already at work, full-time. Places that produce iron
are the only sites that might benefit from this, if
they can find armorers to do the work.


ARMORY (p90)
This is a smith and smithy for the Armorer to make
weapons and armor to sell, and also to repair the
lord’s armor, weapons and so on.
The armory is not for the blacksmith, whose job
it is to make common tools like horsehoes, nails
and other implements for both the common people
and the resident noble. He has his own smithy.
Cost: ￡ 10
Maintenance: ￡ 2 for personnel, ￡ 2 for raw materials,
charcoal, etc.
Income: ￡ 5
Note: If the owner also holds an Iron Mine, then
he can get his ￡ 2 of raw iron in exchange for ￡ 1 of
income from his iron mine.

POSITIVE
I love the maps and writeups of the Estates. The Special and other tables seem really interesting. I wish the Estates had more detail or one had been done in significant detail so we could see the possibilities inherent in them. Also, the book seems very well-researched and written with an easy hand for good comprehension. Its the organization and opposing tones/goals that create confusion.

EDITED: To clarify concerns about towns and villages.

if i can be honest, i have buyer's remorse for this title. Lordly Domains suddenly seems like it might be put to use in my game as an alternative to estate, at least as far as warfare from a command prospective. my player who also purchased it flatly refuse to use it for his wealthy knight as it removes all the risk/thrill BotM had.
for being "simpler" it called for more calculation. the knee jerk reaction of my group maybe the death of My GPC :( they are suggesting the remainder of my Rotation be Savage Worlds and i am inclined to agree. maybe in my head what i wanted was rules for towns and armies and so it's my fault but then again the book just to away from the 5.1 system. it seemed like it should have been published as a rules revision ???

Thanks, guys, for the feedback — I'm just now seeing this for the first time and there's too much to respond to at this sitting, but suffice it to say I'm sorry the book didn't meet with your expectations.

Kilgs, it seems you're craving the kind of details that are antithetical to the book's mission, which was to reduce the complexities of running an estate. Yes, the damage system is abstract and doesn't get into specific values of towns, etc. — but that kind of detail would have undermined the simplicity of the system. Those can be assigned by the Gamemaster if it's important to him or his players.

Sir Cripple, not sure how you concluded the book requires more calculation. It provides some economic models for how estates are run — to illustrate different size estates — but doesn't require you to go through that process yourself. Every year the lord gets the income his estate produces, unless suffering raid or calamity. You can choose one of the ten estates and just run with it, if you so desire. Or modify it as you will, or create a new one using the other ten as examples.

As for the Pendragon Naming System, we knew this would be controversial — some people will like it, some won't. But it doesn't have to be adopted. You can continue to use your old maps with the old names. The book provides the conversions in the back to facilitate this for people who don't want to go down that road. It's the exploration of the feudal system here that's the real thrust of the book, and we hope people will find value in the knightly "career ladder", rewards guidelines, officer descriptions, sample estates, etc.

Don't have time to go through point-by-point in your list tonight, Kilgs, but we really do appreciate all honest feedback. We'll address these in the coming days. If we find a trend or consensus in the comments and we need to make some changes to the book, we can do so in future versions. Thanks for taking the time for such a thorough response.

Best,



T.

CONTRADICTIONS
There appear to be contradictions or opposing authors/writing within the document. Here is one example of the contradictions within the document:


P34--The apparent opportunity to turn a profit
through the armory is illusory. Iron is rare, sometimes
even rationed, and the weapon-maker is
already at work, full-time. Places that produce iron
are the only sites that might benefit from this, if
they can find armorers to do the work.


ARMORY (p90)
This is a smith and smithy for the Armorer to make
weapons and armor to sell, and also to repair the
lord’s armor, weapons and so on.
The armory is not for the blacksmith, whose job
it is to make common tools like horsehoes, nails
and other implements for both the common people
and the resident noble. He has his own smithy.
Cost: ￡ 10
Maintenance: ￡ 2 for personnel, ￡ 2 for raw materials,
charcoal, etc.
Income: ￡ 5
Note: If the owner also holds an Iron Mine, then
he can get his ￡ 2 of raw iron in exchange for ￡ 1 of
income from his iron mine.



This is not a contradiction. The owner of an armory has to be near an Iron mine, though that does not mean he owns it!
Real castles were not the places that produced arms and armor. Gary Gygax (aka the designer of the first edition Advanced Dungeons and Dragons) introduced his false idea into RPGs and Greg followed it and is correcting it somewhat in the BOE. Castle smithies were mainly there to shoe horses and make tools. Historically most Knights used swords manufactured in one of the three rival cities famed for their making: Solingen (Germany); Bordeaux (France...sort of) and Toledo (Spain). In England most of the poor knights (KAP Household Knights) would have had swords from Sheffield.

Swords were made at cities with access to better quality iron ore and a guild of Sword smiths who were expert in their making. The handles and sheathes with their fitting were made locally and mainly custom made for their user.

HOUSEHOLD BONUS INCOME TABLES
p.30, Bonus income for Officers/Household: this list appears to be incomplete. My version has officers working for free in more powerful estates. Almost no one receives bonus income except in a 10 Libram Estate. Likely a formatting issue in the table.


Strewth! You have indeed found a blunder. My bad. As editor, I shoulda caught that. Here's a link to the corrected table. (https://www.dropbox.com/s/k46oc58gf6xzv6f/Estate-Household-Bonus-Pay.pdf)

Thanks for catching that, Kilgs. I'll also put this in an errata thread.

We'll wait for a little while to catch any other errata before issuing a new version on DriveThruRPG.


Best,


T.

I feel really bad and maybe it's due to being Monday. But I'm not real impressed...

ON A QUICK READ
I guess I’m disappointed. Hopefully this will change as I get a chance to read it more thoroughly.

I hope that, too. We work really hard to achieve clarity. But once again, I thank you for voicing these concerns and allowing us to address them.


But it was very confusing to read, calculations strewn about in blocks of text, formulas and concepts not very well-explained or multiple times.

Respectfully, I think you're drawing some pretty broad generalizations. Please cite examples of calculations "strewn about in texts." The only thing I think of is the "=" in the Book Creation and Yeth Hound description, where we're talking about making a roll, where "Success = X, Failure = y", etc. In fact, the only real calculation I can find in the book is the formulae for finding the area of an enclosure in the appendix.


Lots of “if this were real, but it’s not, but here are the numbers.”

"Lots of?" Again, if you could provide specific examples, I could respond more effectively, but I can't really find anything like this in the book.


There appears to be a significant disconnect between a simplified economic system and something more realistic. Almost as if there were two authors, one creating a “hard” economic system and the other trying to make it streamlined. This book seems incomplete. Half-finished, unfortunately, and stuck somewhere between Harn and Book of the Manor.

It's a tricky balancing act, meeting the needs of people who want a streamlined system and those who want to understand how it "works." I can say, as a general comment, that we try to avoid absolutes because we don't want to ossify the system. So when we provide detailed examples of "typical" budgets for a manor or estate we're doing it to illustrate the methodology, so that Gamemasters can customize things to their liking — or not. One can just take one of these and run with it, take one of the ten example estates and run with it, or modify one of the models or examples to very quickly design a custom estate that's consistent with the models and examples. People who really want something unique can deconstruct the models and examples to create whatever they want. So rather than being a disconnect, it's an opportunity to give both types of players what they want and need. For people that don't care about how things work, they need not get bogged down in the ten-page section on economics.

I assure you, there's only one author. As editor I strive to clarify and organize the information, and I contribute concepts and ideas, but Greg's the only author. Your perception has more to do with the aforementioned balancing act than anything else.

As for Hârn, I've read Hârn Manors, but Greg's never seen it. IMHO Hârn Manors is way more detailed and complex, and heavy with calculations, than even the Book of the Manor. The Book of the Estate provides a system that's much more streamlined than either. There's hardly any math at all, once your estate is designed. And, of course, if you choose one of the models or examples, there's not even that. You just need to track Damage, Repairs, (both of which provide some variability without the calculations for Weather, Harvests, Fate, etc. of Manor) and Improvements on an annual basis.


It’s Monday so maybe I’m crabby. I love the detail that is provided but I just can’t figure out which detail is for use in-game and which is just fluff. That detail which does exist is sorely lacking in places where it should be detailed.

Your mileage may vary; it's unfortunately impossible to satisfy everyone's idea of what's enough detail and what's not. Thank goodness we have these forums where players can interact with the designers and offer their own house rules.


For example, there is nothing about having vassal knights and yet I know I owe my farrier an extra libram. Which I actually don’t owe him because its already included in my budget.

Yep. The farrier represents the bonus a Rich Knight gets on his annual herd rolls (Detail). The fact that it's already included in the budget means there's no calculation to make (Streamlined). I'll address vassal knights later.


Hopefully a more careful read will show that this opinion is uninformed.

If not, I hope my attempts to explain will help. But my hat's off to you — your post is a helluva time-commitment, after only one quick read! Thanks for the passion you bring to the forums.


Here are some specific items that cause concern, questions or just need minor corrections:

I'll address these soon. Thanks in advance for your patience.


Best,


T.

I feel really bad and maybe it's due to being Monday.
Hopefully a more careful read will show that this opinion is uninformed.

Please get back to us after you have.

EARLY PHASE 485-518
This is on the title page… does this mean that there will be another one?

That's a safe inference to draw, yes.



NO EXPANSION OF MILITARY
For me, the entire fun of having a sizable estate would be to have that Field Army… but there is little to no discussion of it. The only place to find the cost for military personnel is to extrapolate it from the example household lists. I realize that the game is about knights but I think having 20-30 men-at-arms could make for interesting times. It deserves attention.

This book is not about armies, but about the estate that finances the army. Even still, there's a section on Military Service (and what it entails), a few pages on how the Army is organized and paid for, details of the Field (and Garrison) contingents in the detailed budget models, a table on how to extrapolate the size of the army for estate of any size, the effects of economic shortfalls on the army, explanation of the roles of the lord's officers, a career path for knights moving up through the ranks, an explanation on how to recruit household knights, and a place on the Estate Record Sheet dedicated to the lord's army. There's also discussion of siegecraft in the early Period. So I have to admit — I'm scratching my head a bit on how you can conclude "there's no discussion of [armies]."


NO DISCUSSION OF VASSAL KNIGHTS
Again, the importance of vassals is hardly touched on. What about gifts to vassal knights? Granting manors to obtain their services, using marriage as a tool to secure loyalty? Pages 25-26 are about all we see.

The book establishes (on p. 25-26) that, in the Early Phase, subinfeudation is rare and most knights at this level are more likely to have household knights rather than vassals. They are more likely to be a vassal, than to have vassals of their own — at this level.


HUNDRED MOOT/COURT
Lots of talk about income from Hundred Moots but no discussion or tables for cases that may come before the knight? This is a rather significant post and, if it’s going to be incorporated into the game, deserves some attention.

SHERIFFS
Okay, so now we have Sheriffs. Very cool! That changes lots of things. What happens to them during the Anarchy? How does one create that Office? Or become that office? They now have castles which were occupied by other nobles in most games. Again, a significant change which is glossed over. Seems like a logical post for a Player Character, so it might be important to discuss it? Granted, it may come out in the Book of Uther but we get no real information here.

Although the book expands the concept of land administration to include things like hundreds, moots, and sheriffs, this book is not about them, nor the administration of the law. It does set the stage for another book, perhaps.


CHANGING NAMES (Likely personal opinion)
In theory, this sounded like a good idea. But for someone who is not an Arthurian scholar, you have just made my life that much more difficult. And apparently, all my pretty colored maps are obsolete. Now there are different names for every location. The GPC is already an incredible body of work that requires careful reading. But now players and GMs will be using two different lexicons for the geography and, possibly, different maps. Every published material is now out-of-date and confusion will continue to mount as new products come out under this scheme.

Greg has addressed the issue of the Pendragon Naming System in another thread. His game, his concept. I actually encouraged him to go one step further and give everything Welsh names, but he thought that might introduce too many other issues, like difficult pronunciation, etc. Plus, he wanted to evoke those traditional Arthurian place names, and in retrospect I think he made the right call.


It is mentioned that this is not England but the land of the Pendragons. So why change the names then?

Because...it's not England but the land of the Pendragons. Not trying to sound glib, but you answered the question before you asked it.


Now future maps won’t coincide with published maps, Stafford’s excellent political list is out of date, and people like me are back at square one.

You can always continue to use the traditional names and maps. Also a new ATLAS is planned, and Greg will be publishing two-way "interpretations" to make it easy for people.


Historical accuracy is not a feature for me since the game is about knights in Pendragon’s Britain. Consistency is.

I understand. This is not about historical accuracy, but about being true, thematically to a vision of a mythical England before the Saxon conquest. That horse, as they say, is out of the barn.


MARLBOROUGH v. GENTIAN
Perfect example. What the heck is Marlborough? Is it a County? Is it a Barony?
In the Pendragon 5th, Marlboro is a Barony north of Salisbury.
In the GPC, Marlborough is a County north of Salisbury. It does not include Calne.
In Stafford's Political List, Marlborough is a County north of Salisbury.
Now, there is no such thing. We have Gentrian County with different boundaries and towns… (like Calne!)

As shown on Table 1.1, Table 4.1, the maps on p. 9 and 110, and Appendix A, Gentian is now officially a county in the new world order.


SURVIVAL TABLES (p22)
Survival tables are confusing with the status of War, Famine etc. It is not explained in advance that certain status descriptions (Famine, War etc) are applied to each year from the start. These should be clearly labeled as being applied first. The first modifier listed assumes you know this.

? The second paragraph in the section introducing the table says "Certain modifiers apply to the first roll in determining Death." Then, all of the modifiers are organized by type and labeled "X Modifiers" in boldface type. Given the limitations of space, I don't know how to label these more clearly.

I did spot an error on the actual table, where the "Death" footnote says "If the cause of death was due to one of the modifiers above..." Clearly that should say "below." Another one for the errata thread. Sorry I missed that.



HOUSEHOLD BONUS INCOME TABLES
p.30, Bonus income for Officers/Household: this list appears to be incomplete. My version has officers working for free in more powerful estates. Almost no one receives bonus income except in a 10 Libram Estate. Likely a formatting issue in the table.

I addressed this yesterday and posted a new version of the chart. Thanks for catching that.


TABLE 3.6 and 3.7
Income AND Lots, these are not identified properly as the same thing. Tables give impression that they are different things. This is corrected on the next page. Or is it. I’m confused… damage occurs in 10% of total income but it only repairs at 1 libram a year?

p. 44: "Each Lot represents ten percent of a holding’s full, undamaged Assized Rent. The Lot’s value is not recalculated when damaged; a Lot is always equal to one-tenth of the Assized Rent of the intact holding. When the holding is damaged, the damage is measured in Lots. "

Recovery is also measured in Lots, not Librum. "Income" on the labels do not mean currency (no "£" on these numbers), but production, expressed in Lots.


HANTONNE MANOR (p69)
No mention of it being overrun by Saxons. Mentioned in the next estate entry though that Saxons will overrun it.

Fair enough. I'll capture it for the errata, thanks.


NEW SKILLS
I like the Diplomacy skill but it tends to downplay Courtesy in this role.

Sounds more like an opinion than a grievance. Think of Diplomacy as Courtesy among foreign courts, where the people and customs are strange. You may have to behave completely differently as an envoy in a Saxon court, than you would in Salisbury, for example.


VILLAGES, TOWNS AND CITIES
No values attached to specific communities. Sure I can calculate damage from a raid but what if one of my hamlets is conquered... how does that affect my income? How many villages per estate? Hamlets? Towns? It appears to just be up to me...

It is. The value is in the land not in the small communities of peasants that work the land. Crops and inventories are destroyed, people are killed resulting in a loss that is measured in Lots. If the Gamemaster wants to get more granular and ascribe values to the actual settlements, suffice it to say we decided that was a bridge to far on the "Detail" scale. the Book promises a simpler landholding system, after all.


I was hoping for far more information on the control, administration and improvement of villages, towns and markets.

It is not the job of an adventuring knight to administer or improve such things, only his estate.


At a minimum, features within an estate should have a value attached to them. This seems like a major oversight.

? The book describes how estates benefit financially from neighboring Market Towns, Cities, and Ports. See p. 57-48. Furthermore, several of the sample estates show examples of various Additions, including all of the above as well as abbeys and other features.

Thanks again for your comments, Kilgs. But, it seems like the biggest issue here is you were expecting some other book. I tried to manage expectations of what was in this book, even going so far as to post the Table of Contents and Introduction a couple of months ago. We will try harder next time!

I will reply to your remaining questions as I can.


Best,


T.

That helps clear it up more by pointing it towards interactions foreign courts. The description of the skill just references powerful people. Which I think also is valid since dealing with your local liege and a King are different things. I like the skill and think it needs to exist just a bit more specificity for when it was used I thought would be helpful to keep it from minimizing Courtesy. Or vice versa.

Well, I don't know that it's exclusively foreign courts, necessarily, but it's easier to understand the difference between Diplomacy and Courtesy if you use that as an example. We were perhaps not as explicit as we could have been but the definition of Diplomacy is "the profession, activity, or skill of managing international relations, typically by a country's representatives abroad" so this is the context I use when thinking about the skill.

Best,


T.

Vassal Knights
I'll address the issue of vassal knights in re: BoESTATE.

Vassal Knights are rare, not everyday.
Granting land to a vassal means reducing your income, removing any cushion of financial flexibility, giving away your inheritance, and giving away your power to someone who will be in a position to complain.
Great landholders have more to give from, and thus suffer less from all of that self-weakening. Look at Roderick--one of the most powerful lords in Logres, and he has 25 vassals in Salisbury out of about 70 knights, 20 of whom hold just a single manor. The ration of income is about 80% to the count, 20% to the vassals.

That being said,
creating a vassal knight is simple.
Decide how much income you want him to have--£10 is normal.
Reduce the number of garrison by 1 and footmen by 2.
Decide which settlement is his manor.
Done.
If he wants to know who works for him now, see page 30 BoESTATE.

Vassal Knights
I'll address the issue of vassal knights in re: BoESTATE.



I thought there was some text in beginning of BoE regarding vassals. I could be mistaken. I haven't seen the pdf.

The point was that with BoE accounting it doesn't matter whether they are vassals or household knights. £10 = 1 knight, 2 soldiers, 1 garrison. So, even if you give out a £10 manor, the overall accounting is still the same. The estate was £50. Subinfeuding beyond that doesn't change the lord's servitum debitum of 5 knights (1 per £10) and his lands are still assized at the full value.

In a role playing sense it might make sense to keep track since a recalcitrant vassal is harder to replace than a household knight that is more directly dependent upon the lord.

NT

I wish the Book of the Estate was in soft cover print I dont do pdf's

Well, Taliesin has been mentioning a POD (Print On Demand) version in the works, so I reckon you can get your dead tree version soon. :)

Correct! We've already submitted everything for these, and we're just waiting for the proofs to come back. Should be any day now. We'll be offering both soft cover and hard cover. These take a little more time to produce than the downloadable PDFs, which is good, because it gives us a chance to correct some errata before publishing the POD versions. These should be available at some point very soon. Then I'm going to turn my attention back to the BOOK Of BATTLE II and produce POD versions of them as well, as promised.

In about a month we'll start production on the BOOK OF THE WARLORD — the book of the upper nobility! We'll have that one ready sometime in the third quarter, hopefully.


Best,


T.

In about a month we'll start production on the BOOK OF THE WARLORD — the book of the upper nobility! We'll have that one ready sometime in the third quarter, hopefully.


That's great news! What about BoUTHER? Is that one coming along too?

Yes, indeed. The BOOK OF UTHER is next in line after WARLORDS. I'd like to say we could have UTHER out by Christmas, that may be a bit aggressive. We'll see...


T.

Yes, indeed. The BOOK OF UTHER is next in line after WARLORDS. I'd like to say we could have UTHER out by Christmas, that may be a bit aggressive. We'll see...

T.


Thanks, T.

Bummer for me, I might have to start a new campaign soon, and would love to have BoUTHER for that. Well, what can you do?

WOW IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT YOU GUYS ARE REALLY WORKING OVER TIME TO REPRODUCE ALL NEW BOOKS FOR THE NEW KAP AND LOOKS LIKE YOUR SUPPORTING I WELL TOO! THANKS FOR THAT IT HAS BEEN A LONG TIME SINSE KAP WAS IN STEADY PRINT.

Any ideas of when we might see the Book of the Estate in dead tree format?
My GPC players are getting fed up with using the Book of Manors for multiple manors and im hoping that I can pick this up soon and try and halt their moaning :)

Any ideas of when we might see the Book of the Estate in dead tree format?
My GPC players are getting fed up with using the Book of Manors for multiple manors and im hoping that I can pick this up soon and try and halt their moaning :)


Keep and eye on DriveThru over the weekend....specifically, Sunday. No promises, but our plan is to have them available then. If not then, very, very soon. We just need to make sure the errata is reflected in these versions and then upload them to the catalog. We're definitely talking days, not weeks.

Best,


T.

The Book of the Estate has just been updated to version 1.2. If you've already purchased the PDF, download it again. For those of you who have been waiting for this update, the wait is over. Buy it here:

http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/115353/Book-of-the-Estate

This update incorporates all the errata to-date. For those waiting for the print-on-demand versions, I'm happy to report that specs for both soft- and hard-cover editions have been submitted to DriveThru. They will be available for sale as soon as DriveThru verifies the files. Should be any time now..


T.

The Book of the Estate is now available in nice hardcover and softcover editions!

Check out pix here (https://www.dropbox.com/s/oohvquvs94t9qcd/IMG_1122.JPG) and here (https://www.dropbox.com/s/2c8agjohwtdukeb/IMG_1123.JPG)!

Buy it here (http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/product/115353/Book-of-the-Estate)!

We'd still love to hear what you think about this book!


T.

The new book of Estate is showing now here along with others http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/index.php?filters=0_0_44536_0_0&term=Pendr

If you purchased the Book of the Estate in downloadable PDF form, and would like a printed copy as well — either in hardback or softcover — Nocturnal is issuing coupons so you can order the printed books at the same price you'd pay if you were to by the same books bundled together. Make sure you've allowed publishers to contact you via email in your account profile on DriveThru RPG and you'll receive said coupon in your Inbox. Nocturnal just emailed such an offer yesterday to all people who subscribe to their updates. If you missed it, let me know — perhaps we'll extend the offer again soonish. I'm sure we'll be making the same offer with the Book of Battle 2nd Edition, the POD versions of which should be hitting the store any day now...


Thanks,


T.

I set it to accept emails from Nocturnal a few weeks back but I've not received a voucher for the PoD version. :-(

Thanks, LN — I'll notify the appropriate party immediately. Maybe he'll resend...


Best,


T.

I also have not received a voucher for the POD version.

I'm told it was sent to all who made the appropriate purchase. I know I received it, so we must assume the email got blocked by your anti-spam routines. If you can't find it, please write to info@nocturnal-media.com for speedy action.


Best,


T.

I received it.

My hardcopy has been dispatched and I'm eagerly awaiting it! Looking forward to being able to order a hardcopy of it's companion, the Book of Battle.

My hardcopy has been dispatched and I'm eagerly awaiting it! Looking forward to being able to order a hardcopy of it's companion, the Book of Battle.


I just got back the final proof of Battle and it looks great! It should be hitting the DruveThru site any time now. I'm surprised it's not up there already...

Next up: the Book of the Warlord! We hope to have that one available by Christmas. It's gonna have a boatload of maps, and we're working on the über PENDRAGON map, which will inform these, as well as The Great Pendragon Atlas and maps for all PENDRAGON publications going forward. It is very cool — but needs to be finished before we can start in earnest on Warlord production.


Best,


T.

Will WARLORD cover the entire campaign period or will it cover only a portion, like ESTATE? (I have to admit that's something that's keeping me off buying ESTATE; I'd expect a 120 pages book with a nice streamlined rule-set for managing estates of 10-100£ to at least cover the entire period; otherwise we'll have to buy FOUR ~120 pages books just to have estate management rules :o; can't say I'm particularly happy with the direction these supplements are taking in that regard.).

Will WARLORD cover the entire campaign period or will it cover only a portion, like ESTATE? (I have to admit that's something that's keeping me off buying ESTATE; I'd expect a 120 pages book with a nice streamlined rule-set for managing estates of 10-100£ to at least cover the entire period; otherwise we'll have to buy FOUR ~120 pages books just to have estate management rules :o; can't say I'm particularly happy with the direction these supplements are taking in that regard.).


Thanks for the feedback., Gorgon. Yes. Like ESTATE the focus of WARLORD is the Early Phase of the Great Pendragon Camapaign. There is another book planned for the nobles of Arthur's court.

Your point is well taken but you don't have to buy four books, of course. But if you did you'd have an ungodly amount of great PENDRAGON material, suitable for any size landholding in any Phase of the GPC. The core rules are in ESTATE, but that book also features TEN "small" holdings that are ready to run. WARLORD will not repeat those rules as much as expand them to include larger holdings for the upper nobility. One of the common themes we've heard here is that people want more detail. Well, WARLORD will name and locate all the castles of the Early Phase and detail SIX of these large holdings, plus describe the holdings of the Uther's warlords. Lots of maps, new solos for Lords, a mini-game of Graft, and lots of other fun stuff for those players who reach the upper echelon of society. If we were to put all this into one book, it would be a mammoth, budget-busting tome and take much longer to produce.

So this is not a strategy to sell more books. It is rather the only way we've been able to come up with to offer the material in affordable "chunks." Too, players who have already entered Arthur's reign have no need for the Uther material and those that are still in the Early Phase won't need the Arthurian material for some time. So this was the best way we could see to offer the maximum detail and flexibility.

I recommend toe-dipping and getting ESTATE. You'll have the core landholding rules and can always decide later whether the subsequent books offer additional value for your campaign. If you don't crave the detail that others do, you can pass them by easily enough.



Best,


T.

Dear Taliesin,

thanks for the answer. Yes, I admit that I would have prefered a single 120 pages tome depicting everything needed for runing estates of every size in any period. I like simple, streamlined rules under one cover. But rest assured that I'm not implying this is a strategy to sell more books. I see the value in what you are doing, and I'm really grateful to the good knights at Nocturnal for bringing Pendragon back from the land of the dead.


Well, WARLORD will name and locate all the castles of the Early Phase and detail SIX of these large holdings, plus describe the holdings of the Uther's warlords. Lots of maps, new solos for Lords, a mini-game of Graft, and lots of other fun stuff for those players who reach the upper echelon of society.

:o ...oh boy, you got me there. I don't think I'll be able to keep my pants on now. I'll be ordering ESTATE next month when the moneys come. ;D

By the way, to what level will WARLORDS cover? Will it give support to PKs that may make it to Duke/Earl (or even King under the High-King) level?

Thanks again for the reply, Taliesin. Let me assure that I DO think you guys are making an excelent job together with Greg on Pendragon. Thanks for that.

Best wishes,
Gorgon.

Dear Taliesin,

thanks for the answer. Yes, I admit that I would have prefered a single 120 pages tome depicting everything needed for runing estates of every size in any period.

Well, me too, if truth be told. But there's so much ground to tread with this milieu! The mind boggles...


I like simple, streamlined rules under one cover. But rest assured that I'm not implying this is a strategy to sell more books. I see the value in what you are doing, and I'm really grateful to the good knights at Nocturnal for bringing Pendragon back from the land of the dead.

Thanks, man. We're having a blast, and can only hope the products are received with as much enthusiasm as we have creating them.


:o ...oh boy, you got me there. I don't think I'll be able to keep my pants on now. I'll be ordering ESTATE next month when the moneys come. ;D

It is truly an exceptional book. You won't regret it.


By the way, to what level will WARLORDS cover? Will it give support to PKs that may make it to Duke/Earl (or even King under the High-King) level?

Dukes, Counts and Earls, yes. There's rules for creating your own "Honour" (a very large baronial landholding). Sub-kings — not so much (although we do have a provision for Glory rewards for reaching that pinnacle of success). There are also rules for quickly creating stats for such characters for use as NPCs and a system for creating baronial holdings of £300 or so.


Thanks again for the reply, Taliesin. Let me assure that I DO think you guys are making an excelent job together with Greg on Pendragon. Thanks for that.

Our pleasure. I know Greg feels this is somewhat of a Renaissance for the game and we all hope you'll help spread the word that the game is back and better than ever!


T.

I finally received an email with a $10 discount for the POD version of Book of Battle. No news about Book of the Estate though.

Just ordered The Book of the Estate, hardcover. I also ordered a few days ago The Book of Knights & Ladies. ;D

I decided against ordering The Book of Battle, 2nd ed, though. After reading through all the stuff here, including the online battle threads, it seems like it's not my cup of tee. Way too involved for my tastes, like BotM. I'd prefer to see a streamlined, fast and colourful battle system along the lines of the Modular Battle system in Beyond the Wall, that still allows for players to affect the outcome of non-scripted battles. So I hope 6th ed core book will finally deliver a definitive, crystallized system for battles.

Anyway, I'm happy. Now waiting for The Book of the Warlord and The Book of Uther...

Thanks, Gorgon.

I will say that the Book of Battle system is fairly fast playing once you get the process down. And the new book makes it easier than ever to learn. The threads here are a little deceiving, as they all describe the Book of Battle 1st Ed, and even a very early play test. The system was fairly well overhauled and at least one variable (Battle Size) was dropped.

The Second Edition is much easier to "grok" and to play, IMO.

Tell ya, what I'll do: I'll excerpt the new play-by-play example from the Second Edition and post it here. Then you can see the system, up close and personal. If you still think it's not for you, no harm no foul.

But don't hold your breath waiting for a light-weight system. Even if we concurred, it would be many, many moons before we could address it — as in, years. This is the only official mass combat system you're likely to see for quite some time. Would love to see some fan offerings in this area, but for now we're happy with BOB II. Our plate is full of Pendragony goodness for the coming year(s); this is not ground we're likely to retread.


Best,


T.

Thanks, Gorgon.

No problem. It's a pleasure to help you guys.



Tell ya, what I'll do: I'll excerpt the new play-by-play example from the Second Edition and post it here. Then you can see the system, up close and personal. If you still think it's not for you, no harm no foul.

That would be really welcome!




But don't hold your breath waiting for a light-weight system. Even if we concurred, it would be many, many moons before we could address it — as in, years. This is the only official mass combat system you're likely to see for quite some time. Would love to see some fan offerings in this area, but for now we're happy with BOB II. Our plate is full of Pendragony goodness for the coming year(s); this is not ground we're likely to retread.



Yes, I know. The only place were it would make sense to put a simplified system would be in a future 6th edition of the core book (I certainly don't want The Book of Simplified Combat), and that's far in the future. I may have to come up with my own thing. But still, it would be nice to see that example from BoBII.

Thank you very much for the excelent work.

Gorgon, you might wish to take a look here:
http://nocturnal-media.com/forum/index.php?topic=2056.0

It is a 'variant' battle system that I threw together for our campaign, heavily influenced by the modular battle system from Beyond the Wall.

Gorgon, you might wish to take a look here:
http://nocturnal-media.com/forum/index.php?topic=2056.0

It is a 'variant' battle system that I threw together for our campaign, heavily influenced by the modular battle system from Beyond the Wall.


Thanks, Morien. I'll take a look when I get back home (I'm at work now).

Sorry this took me awhile, but here are links to a couple of excerpts from the Book of Battle, 2nd Edition:

Mearcred Creek Tutorial (https://www.dropbox.com/s/7yj1ooctx0imqvy/Mearcred_Creek.pdf)

Battle of Medbourne Example (https://www.dropbox.com/s/3ytc14bzv1l6wg5/Medbourne.pdf)


The first is a step-by-step tutorial. The second is a turn by turn account of a battle. So that's two fully fleshed out battles that folks can use to make a decision on whether BoB is for them or not.

Hope this helps!


Best,


T.

Taliesin,

thanks a lot! I'll definitely take a look at it.

Taliesin,

I took a look at the pdfs; really nice stuff, you guys did a great job! I'm not yet starting a new campaign (maybe next year), but I may have to bend down and order this after all. But I do have to admit that it is still a bit to involved for my taste. I guess the final decision will also depend on my player group at the time and how much involved they want battles to be. Nevertheless, it seems like a top notch product (and I wouldn't expect otherwise from The Good People at Nocturnal & Greg).

As for the BotE, my copy just arrived today. I only read the Introduction and I took a cursory look at the rest of the book, but so far this seems to be exactly what I was wishing for. Simpler system than BotM, easily scalable to estates of any size, little time spent on fiddling with finances (but still allowing for lots of options and customization), lots of juicy background, great maps, great layout. This is what I always wanted a Pendragon system for running estates of any size to be since Lordly Domains. You guys are to be congratulated for such an excellent work.

Questions: Book of the Baron will be Book of the Warlord "II" for Arthur's period; will there be an equivalent to Book of the Estate for Arthur's period too (4 books in total)?

Also, any news on The Book of Castles & Sieges? What about that book mentioned in the poll called Book of New Settlements (what's that supposed to be about anyway)?

Now please hurry up with Book of the Warlord, Book of Uther, Book of the Baron and Book of Arthur. My wallet is waiting.

Taliesin,

I took a look at the pdfs; really nice stuff, you guys did a great job! I'm not yet starting a new campaign (maybe next year), but I may have to bend down and order this after all. But I do have to admit that it is still a bit to involved for my taste. I guess the final decision will also depend on my player group at the time and how much involved they want battles to be. Nevertheless, it seems like a top notch product (and I wouldn't expect otherwise from The Good People at Nocturnal & Greg).

Aw, thanks, Gorgon! You can easily run a battle in an evening and it does go pretty fast, when you're acclimated to the system. We do hope you'll give it a shot.


As for the BotE, my copy just arrived today. I only read the Introduction and I took a cursory look at the rest of the book, but so far this seems to be exactly what I was wishing for. Simpler system than BotM, easily scalable to estates of any size, little time spent on fiddling with finances (but still allowing for lots of options and customization), lots of juicy background, great maps, great layout. This is what I always wanted a Pendragon system for running estates of any size to be since Lordly Domains. You guys are to be congratulated for such an excellent work.

Thanks, so much. We're very happy with the book and are hard at work on it's sequel, the Book of the Warlord.


Questions: Book of the Baron will be Book of the Warlord "II" for Arthur's period; will there be an equivalent to Book of the Estate for Arthur's period too (4 books in total)?

Someone else asked that question and presumably the answer is "yes", but our product pipeline is not that well defined (yet). Since Greg has hinted the Book of the Manor is more suitable for Late Phase play, maybe it will simply be updated and revised.


Also, any news on The Book of Castles & Sieges? What about that book mentioned in the poll called Book of New Settlements (what's that supposed to be about anyway)?

No, I know it's in development, as is the Book of the Tourney, but I don't know exactly where they are. You won't see them this year, that's for sure. Probably 2014. The very next books you'll see are WARLORD and, probably UTHER after that, which will pretty well round out this series of books for the Early Phase.


Now please hurry up with Book of the Warlord, Book of Uther, Book of the Baron and Book of Arthur. My wallet is waiting.

We're working as hard as we can. So glad to hear you're liking the books! Please consider posting a review on Drive Thru RPG or RPG.net. We really need to spread the word that KAP is back and better than ever — with a lot of good support behind it!


Best,


T.

Sir Gorgon

I am just folowing up on Taliesin


I took a look at the pdfs; really nice stuff, you guys did a great job! I'm not yet starting a new campaign (maybe next year), but I may have to bend down and order this after all. But I do have to admit that it is still a bit to involved for my taste. I guess the final decision will also depend on my player group at the time and how much involved they want battles to be. Nevertheless, it seems like a top notch product (and I wouldn't expect otherwise from The Good People at Nocturnal & Greg).

Just to reiterate, Battles are much simpler than the written instructions seem to make them
They are also more fun
and give the PKs a chance to affect the battle result


As for the BotE, my copy just arrived today. I only read the Introduction and I took a cursory look at the rest of the book, but so far this seems to be exactly what I was wishing for. Simpler system than BotM, easily scalable to estates of any size, little time spent on fiddling with finances (but still allowing for lots of options and customization), lots of juicy background, great maps, great layout. This is what I always wanted a Pendragon system for running estates of any size to be since Lordly Domains. You guys are to be congratulated for such an excellent work.

Thanks. This is what I always wanted too


Questions: Book of the Baron will be Book of the Warlord "II" for Arthur's period; will there be an equivalent to Book of the Estate for Arthur's period too (4 books in total)?

Please understand that scheduling and planning is always tentative until the product is done
For instance
Book of the Baron will be the follow-up for BoWarlords
and also it may include Book of the Peers, which might be stand alone
depending on the size of Book of Barons
Each covering a portion of the Middle Ages, Early, Middle, Late
I do not plan another BoEstate
I believe it has everything needed for all the phases


Also, any news on The Book of Castles & Sieges?

Yes, it is creeping along as quickly as a man with a real job and a family can do it
this is not me, though I am overseeing it
Patience!


What about that book mentioned in the poll called Book of New Settlements (what's that supposed to be about anyway)?

I don't even know about this one :)


Now please hurry up with Book of the Warlord, Book of Uther, Book of the Baron and Book of Arthur. My wallet is waiting.

Thank you

Sir Gorgon


Thank you for your kindness, dear Sir, but as you can see on the left side of the panel I'm just a poor squire. ;)





Please understand that scheduling and planning is always tentative until the product is done
For instance
Book of the Baron will be the follow-up for BoWarlords
and also it may include Book of the Peers, which might be stand alone
depending on the size of Book of Barons
Each covering a portion of the Middle Ages, Early, Middle, Late
I do not plan another BoEstate
I believe it has everything needed for all the phases


Yes, from what I've seen I was failing to see the point in another BotE just for Arthur's period. You might want to modify (in a future errata update) the part that says "EARLY PHASE 485-518". That will be quite misleading if there is no version for a later period.

Can you hint at what the Book of Peers is supposed to be about?



What about that book mentioned in the poll called Book of New Settlements (what's that supposed to be about anyway)?


I don't even know about this one :)



Lol

Taliesin, what were you thinking when you made that poll?!




So glad to hear you're liking the books! Please consider posting a review on Drive Thru RPG or RPG.net. We really need to spread the word that KAP is back and better than ever — with a lot of good support behind it!

I'll have to read through the whole thing first so that I can do a decent review. If I find the time I'll do it later. Rest assured that I'm making everything possible to spread the word on Pendragon and Nocturnal. :)

Yes, from what I've seen I was failing to see the point in another BotE just for Arthur's period. You might want to modify (in a future errata update) the part that says "EARLY PHASE 485-518". That will be quite misleading if there is no version for a later period.

Oops, thanks
Would you list that in the errata section belo9w?
thanks


Can you hint at what the Book of Peers is supposed to be about?

The nature of nobility changes through the middle ages
Early: Warlords-- Landlords, Fighting
Middle: Barons-- advisors to the king, Landholders
Late: Peers-- political beings, Landlords


What about that book mentioned in the poll called Book of New Settlements (what's that supposed to be about anyway)?

I don't even know about this one :)


Lol
Taliesin, what were you thinking when you made that poll?!

Mercy on Sir Taleisin
I think this was taken from a scenario that I wrote and that I don't plan to see print



Please consider posting a review on Drive Thru RPG or RPG.net. We really need to spread the word that KAP is back and better than ever — with a lot of good support behind it!
[/quote]
Please, everyone do this!

First thing that goes through my head for Book of New Settlement is where Saxons! had the characters setting up a new holding in Britain.

Oops, thanks
Would you list that in the errata section belo9w?
thanks


I will, yes.

EDIT: I just did



First thing that goes through my head for Book of New Settlement is where Saxons! had the characters setting up a new holding in Britain.

Isn't that in Saxons! ?

Taliesin's info on the Book of New Settlements was that it referred to rules for "organically expanding your holdings". This sounds to me more like rules for conquering new (wild) lands and how to incorporate them into the feudal system, organize them, dividing them into chunks (manors, counties, baronies, etc), what goes to the conqueror and what goes to the conqueror's lord(s), etc.

Taliesin, what were you thinking when you made that poll?!

To be completely honest — I made the poll so long ago that I can't now recall the source of that particular book. I can remove it easily enough.


T.

Taliesin, what were you thinking when you made that poll?!

To be completely honest — I made the poll so long ago that I can't now recall the source of that particular book. I can remove it easily enough.


T.


I was just pulling your leg, good Sir knight. :)

First thing that goes through my head for Book of New Settlement is where Saxons! had the characters setting up a new holding in Britain.

Isn't that in Saxons! ?

Taliesin's info on the Book of New Settlements was that it referred to rules for "organically expanding your holdings". This sounds to me more like rules for conquering new (wild) lands and how to incorporate them into the feudal system, organize them, dividing them into chunks (manors, counties, baronies, etc), what goes to the conqueror and what goes to the conqueror's lord(s), etc.


That's what I meant- I couldn't remember any pitch for it, so just by the name, I thought of the scenario in Saxons! Something in reverse might be nifty- post-Badon, rules for re-taking the areas occupied by the Saxons.

Ah, ok, I was interpreting it in a different way, but re-reading your post it's clearer now. Yes, I thought it was mostly about how you'd aquire lands by conquest, mostly lands occupied by tribes, wilderness, etc, and how to incorporate them into the feudal system afterwards. But it seems that Greg is kind of unaware of what this book was supposed to be and Taliesin doesn't remember where the whole thing came from to begin with. I can't say I was particularly interested, since this is something that can be easily left to GM fiat.

Look at Roderick--one of the most powerful lords in Logres, and he has 25 vassals in Salisbury out of about 70 knights, 20 of whom hold just a single manor. The ration of income is about 80% to the count, 20% to the vassals.


This seems to be in contradiction to what is stated in Book of the Estate in page 36, where we read that Count Roderick has 140 knights.

Also, a breakdown into footman and garrison is provided, but there's no mention of sergeants (mounted but not knightly troops). At a rate of one knight per 10 Libra, the 140 knights' number can't include sergeants, so this is not a mix-up of both (his estate is 1420 Libra, thus 140 knights).

Are you implying instead that the "extra" 70 knights in the book are the vassals of Roderick's 5 vassals that have more than one manor? If that's the case it seems way too excessive.

The number of sergeants also needs to be discriminated in that page. We know they exist, they're mentioned, e.g. page 25 states that for each 10 infantry/footmen there is one sergeant in command.

That is a bit of an increase of knights in Salisbury. I'll let Greg handle that, as I don't own BoE.

However, my understanding is that the upkeep for the knights is still £6 that it was in the main rulebook? So that would leave £4 per manor for the upkeep of the Count's lifestyle, court & entourage, and all the odds-and-ends like footmen and sergeants.

That is a bit of an increase of knights in Salisbury. I'll let Greg handle that, as I don't own BoE.

However, my understanding is that the upkeep for the knights is still £6 that it was in the main rulebook? So that would leave £4 per manor for the upkeep of the Count's lifestyle, court & entourage, and all the odds-and-ends like footmen and sergeants.


The ratio of one knight per 10 libra is related to how many knights you need to have to serve your lord, not a cost of upkeep. Vassal knights still cost 6 libra, household 4, etc, for up-keeping, but that's not the issue here here.

The ratio of one knight per 10 libra is related to how many knights you need to have to serve your lord, not a cost of upkeep. Vassal knights still cost 6 libra, household 4, etc, for up-keeping, but that's not the issue here here.


Oh, I see. You meant that the 140 knight figure is 140 knights, not 70 knights + 70 sergeants? I misunderstood you as wondering how Count Roderick would pay the rest of his troops if he is spending all his money on knights at £10 / knight.

The ratio of one knight per 10 libra is related to how many knights you need to have to serve your lord, not a cost of upkeep. Vassal knights still cost 6 libra, household 4, etc, for up-keeping, but that's not the issue here here.


Oh, I see. You meant that the 140 knight figure is 140 knights, not 70 knights + 70 sergeants? I misunderstood you as wondering how Count Roderick would pay the rest of his troops if he is spending all his money on knights at £10 / knight.


No, the question is not related to how he pays the knights. That doesn't really matter here.

Look at Roderick--one of the most powerful lords in Logres, and he has 25 vassals in Salisbury out of about 70 knights, 20 of whom hold just a single manor. The ration of income is about 80% to the count, 20% to the vassals.

This seems to be in contradiction to what is stated in Book of the Estate in page 36, where we read that Count Roderick has 140 knights.

I am not looking at my own books to reply
but Salisbury is only the largest of the Count's holdings
The other half of his knights come from his other holdings


The number of sergeants also needs to be discriminated in that page. We know they exist, they're mentioned, e.g. page 25 states that for each 10 infantry/footmen there is one sergeant in command.


I do not set unit leaders apart from the units
A sargeant of an infantry unit is counted as a footman

Look at Roderick--one of the most powerful lords in Logres, and he has 25 vassals in Salisbury out of about 70 knights, 20 of whom hold just a single manor. The ration of income is about 80% to the count, 20% to the vassals.

This seems to be in contradiction to what is stated in Book of the Estate in page 36, where we read that Count Roderick has 140 knights.

I am not looking at my own books to reply
but Salisbury is only the largest of the Count's holdings
The other half of his knights come from his other holdings


The number of sergeants also needs to be discriminated in that page. We know they exist, they're mentioned, e.g. page 25 states that for each 10 infantry/footmen there is one sergeant in command.

I do not set unit leaders apart from the units
A sargeant of an infantry unit is counted as a footman


That clears it up. Thanks Greg!

Actually, there are still some points that are not clear to me.

1) page 39, the 50 libra estate. In Expenses (army) there's a Commander of Foot, 5 Spearman (garrison) and 9 Spearmen (Army). Does the Commander of Foot commands all of these (14 foot)? Is he the sergeant, and is that why there are only 9 Spearman instead of 10? Who commands the garrison? And if the garrison is sent to the royal castle as is customary per page 25?

2) page 41, the 100 libra estate. In Expenses (army) we now have 19 Spearman (army), a Commander of Foot and 10 footman (garrison). Is the Commander the "twentiest" and why there are only 19 instead of 20 Spearman? Shouldn't there be one sergeant per 10 footman instead, and therefore 18 Spearman and two sergeants, plus another sergeant for the garrison (3 sergeants in total)? Does one sergeant command all 29 footman army AND garrison), or 19 (army) or 10 (garrison)?


Sorry to ask you all these questions, Greg, but it is frustrating for me to see some rule in one place and then examples that apparently don't follow the rules and for which different interpretations can be given. Thank you for your patience.

Actually, there are still some points that are not clear to me.
1) page 39, the 50 libra estate. In Expenses (army) there's a Commander of Foot, 5 Spearman (garrison) and 9 Spearmen (Army). Does the Commander of Foot commands all of these (14 foot)?
If they are assigned to his command, yes.

Is he the sergeant, and is that why there are only 9 Spearman instead of 10?
Yes

Who commands the garrison?
It depends on who is there, and where they are. Everyone knows their rank. If no knights or the commander of foot then the Lady will command them in defense of the manor.
in which case they are under the command of whoever commands the garrison there.

And if the garrison is sent to the royal castle as is customary per page 25?

in which case they are under the command of whoever commands the garrison there.


2) page 41, the 100 libra estate. In Expenses (army) we now have 19 Spearman (army), a Commander of Foot and 10 footman (garrison). Is the Commander the "twentiest" and why there are only 19 instead of 20 Spearman? Shouldn't there be one sergeant per 10 footman instead, and therefore 18 Spearman and two sergeants, plus another sergeant for the garrison (3 sergeants in total)? Does one sergeant command all 29 footman army AND garrison), or 19 (army) or 10 (garrison)?

See above answers. They are the same answers.
As far as being the 20th guy--the actual number of footmen varies according to the lord. He is obliged to being 10 footmen to muster, and so that's a minimum. He might bring more, at his own expense, which is something to keep in mind for playing the BoB.


Sorry to ask you all these questions, Greg, but it is frustrating for me to see some rule in one place and then examples that apparently don't follow the rules and for which different interpretations can be given. Thank you for your patience.
No need to be sorry. It keeps me on my toes and shows where I have made incorrect assumptions or left gaps.
Have pity on Sir Taliesin who gets these in raw form and has to really hammer things out. :)

Thank you for the answers, Greg.



As far as being the 20th guy--the actual number of footmen varies according to the lord. He is obliged to being 10 footmen to muster, and so that's a minimum. He might bring more, at his own expense, which is something to keep in mind for playing the BoB.

I don't think that's the case here. In the case of the 100 libra estate, where we have 19 footman but only one sergent mentioned, these footman are not "extras" for the lord to do as he wishes, because the estate is 100 libra and you need to provide 10 knights and 20 foot (army) to the King, not 10 foot (army). Shouldn't you provide 2 sergents for 20 footman, as per the normal ratio? Or can you just provide 1 sergent per 20 footman if you wish? I ask this not because I'm nitpicking, but because sergeants costs more than spearman to maintain, so it's important to know what's going on. Plus, your King may be expecting 2 sergents and gets 1 instead.

Sir Taliesin commands all my respect, Sir! He's a wonderful employee for Nocturnal and a top notch poster at the forums.

Thanks a bunch again, Greg.

As far as being the 20th guy--the actual number of footmen varies according to the lord. He is obliged to being 10 footmen to muster, and so that's a minimum. He might bring more, at his own expense, which is something to keep in mind for playing the BoB.


I don't think that's the case here.
I only mentioned that as an aside to keep in mind for using the Book of Battle.

Correct. That is not the case here.

In the case of the 100 libra estate, where we have 19 footman but only one sergent mentioned, these footman are not "extras" for the lord to do as he wishes, because the estate is 100 libra and you need to provide 10 knights and 20 foot (army) to the King, not 10 foot (army). Shouldn't you provide 2 sergents for 20 footman, as per the normal ratio?
You can if you wish

Or can you just provide 1 sergent per 20 footman if you wish?

Yes

I ask this not because I'm nitpicking, but because sergeants costs more than spearman to maintain, so it's important to know what's going on. Plus, your King may be expecting 2 sergents and gets 1 instead.
Your call
Have 20 Guardsmen if you want to be really strong

Sir Taliesin commands all my respect, Sir! He's a wonderful employee for Nocturnal and a top notch poster at the forums.

100% agreement

Thank you, that makes it clear to me.

On page 55, on Step 2, we can read:


Note that the values of these caputs vary. The difference will be made up in Outliers, in Step 5.

I presume this refers to the fact that the estates presented don't all have a fixed income of 50 libra. However, I can't find any Step 5.

Gorgon, you might wish to take a look here:
http://nocturnal-media.com/forum/index.php?topic=2056.0

It is a 'variant' battle system that I threw together for our campaign, heavily influenced by the modular battle system from Beyond the Wall.


Morien, I appologize, I just noticed that you sent me a private message a week or so ago regarding this but I only noticed it now. Sorry!

A bunch of more possible errata, concerning Fortifications:

On page 79:
it reads that
"...the Fortification works that surround an area are assumed to enclose the two acres of a hall (with or without a motte), it's stable, and outbuildings, with enough room inside for the commoners and their livestock". In the table, it shows that a Manor House is only 0.5 acres. Is the Manor House just the lord's living house without anything else?



Page 81:

MOTTE, FORTIFIED: the cost is given as 5 libra. Shouldn't this be 10 libra? (Ditch 3 libra + Palisade 5 libra + Postern gate 0 libra + Gateworks 2 libra)

Also, the Ditch is presented as having a DV of 2, but in the previous page it is DV=3. Are you separating the value of a Ditch from that of a Rampart (presumably DV=1)? This isn't discriminated anywhere.


MOTTE AND BAILEY CASTLE: the cost given is 10 libra. But for what exactly? It says that "it has the two-acre bailey". I presume that it doesn't assume you've already built the Bailey previously? The cost should be Bailey 10 libra + Fortified Motte 5 libra + Large Wooden Hall 24 libra, Fortified Wooden Hall 13 libra = 52 libra, not 10.

-Also, why do we have both a Large Wooden Hall and a Fortified Wooden Hall at the same time?

-Also, why is the Fortified Wooden Hall a DV=2 when we are told that, unless specified, it is the same as a Simple Wooden Hall of DV=1 (page 79)?

-Aaaand also, DV should be 5/10/2(1?), not 5/11/2(1?)?


My previous post question, in case you missed it:


On page 55, on Step 2, we can read:


Note that the values of these caputs vary. The difference will be made up in Outliers, in Step 5.

I presume this refers to the fact that the estates presented don't all have a fixed income of 50 libra. However, I can't find any Step 5.

Step 5 on Estate creation is apparently missing.


That's it for possible Estate errata from my part, I think. Hope that's useful.

Anyone? I'm not sure if I misinterpreted something or if those really need correction.

Please list all the errata in the Errata folders below.
Thanks!

-g




A bunch of more possible errata, concerning Fortifications:

On page 79:
it reads that
"...the Fortification works that surround an area are assumed to enclose the two acres of a hall (with or without a motte), it's stable, and outbuildings, with enough room inside for the commoners and their livestock". In the table, it shows that a Manor House is only 0.5 acres. Is the Manor House just the lord's living house without anything else?



Page 81:

MOTTE, FORTIFIED: the cost is given as 5 libra. Shouldn't this be 10 libra? (Ditch 3 libra + Palisade 5 libra + Postern gate 0 libra + Gateworks 2 libra)

Also, the Ditch is presented as having a DV of 2, but in the previous page it is DV=3. Are you separating the value of a Ditch from that of a Rampart (presumably DV=1)? This isn't discriminated anywhere.


MOTTE AND BAILEY CASTLE: the cost given is 10 libra. But for what exactly? It says that "it has the two-acre bailey". I presume that it doesn't assume you've already built the Bailey previously? The cost should be Bailey 10 libra + Fortified Motte 5 libra + Large Wooden Hall 24 libra, Fortified Wooden Hall 13 libra = 52 libra, not 10.

-Also, why do we have both a Large Wooden Hall and a Fortified Wooden Hall at the same time?

-Also, why is the Fortified Wooden Hall a DV=2 when we are told that, unless specified, it is the same as a Simple Wooden Hall of DV=1 (page 79)?

-Aaaand also, DV should be 5/10/2(1?), not 5/11/2(1?)?


My previous post question, in case you missed it:


On page 55, on Step 2, we can read:


Note that the values of these caputs vary. The difference will be made up in Outliers, in Step 5.

I presume this refers to the fact that the estates presented don't all have a fixed income of 50 libra. However, I can't find any Step 5.

Step 5 on Estate creation is apparently missing.


That's it for possible Estate errata from my part, I think. Hope that's useful.

Please list all the errata in the Errata folders below.
Thanks!



I didn't post it directly in the errata threads because I wasn't sure if these were real errors or misinterpretations on my part. I will post them there now (I assume these are real errors and that my "corrections" are...well, correct).

Please list all the errata in the Errata folders below.
Thanks!

I didn't post it directly in the errata threads because I wasn't sure if these were real errors or misinterpretations on my part. I will post them there now (I assume these are real errors and that my "corrections" are...well, correct).

I encourage everyone to post it there whether you are sure or not.
They will be acted upon when a revised edition is done
but list them now, while they are fresh in your head.

I encourage everyone to post it there whether you are sure or not.
They will be acted upon when a revised edition is done
but list them now, while they are fresh in your head.


No problem. They are on the errata section now :)

However I'd like to kindly ask if you or Taliesin could eventually comment on these questions, because like some other customers I bought a print copy, not pdf, so an updated pdf file with errata isn't going to help me.

Anyway, I finished reading BotE and this has been my favorite KAP supplement so far since 5th ed came out. Congratulations everyone on the excellent work. Keep it coming.

Thanks for the feedback, Gorgon. I'll take a look at some of these ASAP — may not be till the weekend. And I may have to defer some of them to Greg. But I'll do might best to dive in and address them.

Regarding the updated PDF: I personally find it useful to have the PDF in addition to the hardback because I can always print a correct entry and physically cut and paste it into the book, if needed. I game with my computer at the table, so that's not often necessary, however. I also like the searchability and bookmarkability of the PDF. Worth thinking about. It's like insurance from the book being made "obsolete" — even a little — by errata.


Thanks for your support, we really appreciate it.


Best,


T.

Thank you, Taliesin. No hurries, weekend or later is fine.

Yes, a PDF version as well as the physical book would be nice, but unfortunately it costs extra money ;D , so I stick to the good old errata lists.

Thank you for everything.

Bought the print-on-demand book at the german games convention "SPIEL". Great work :)