Newbie question. I've read the section on traits multiple times and I'm not quite sure when to ask for trait rolls.
Let me explain how I read the rule and you can tell me if I got it right.

- If someone has a trait at 15 or under, he can act however he likes without rolling. He might roll if he wants to but such a roll won't give him an experience check.
- With a trait value 16 or over, one must roll when under stressful or critical circumstances. On a critical he acts strongly in accordance with the trait, on a success he acts in accordance or could act opposite but must take a check on the opposite trait, on failure he must roll on the opposite trait and on a fumble he acts strongly in accordance with the opposite trait.

So someone with Chaste 14 can be chaste all the time without a roll, but someone with Chaste 17 under special circumstances might act opposite to his trait. Or should a roll be required for high traits only when the player wants to act contrary to them during special circumstances?

As the GM, you use traits to get characters into difficulties and create interesting situations for the players. Call for trait rolls whenever there’s an interesting conflict between a character’s traits and that which would be the prudent, smart thing to do in a given situation.

Keep the characters’ notable traits in mind. Develop the situation, tempt them and call for a roll. If you have good players, they will go with it and enjoy their characters causing all kinds of trouble for themselves. (If they don’t enjoy that, why are they playing Pendragon?)

If the trait is no higher than 15, players can always back out, as you noted, (though this gives the GM the right to eventually decrease the relevant traits), while with traits of 16+, players have to roll and deal with the results.

Example: Your player’s knight is a guest of Sir Firlefanz, noted for his quick temper and his jealousy. Firlefanz’s wife starts flirting with the knight. She’s really hot! She also likes to get under her husband’s skin. Your player’s knight has Lustful 17. Call for a roll.

Your player may take certain precautions, if he sees the problem coming, but ultimately it’s about his character getting his head and slipping the reigns in situations like these.

Of course, it’s also always a good idea to call for a trait roll whenever you player wants to do something that’s opposed to his character’s traits. These situations will come up all the time in play. Calling for rolls will help characters change and develop. Their actions change their traits, and their traits then shape their future actions.

Finally, some players also like to roll for traits, just for it’s own sake; it’s a bit like watching your character come alive for a moment and do things on his own.

Example: Your player’s knight is a guest of Sir Firlefanz, noted for his quick temper and his jealousy. Firlefanz’s wife starts flirting with the knight. She’s really hot! She also likes to get under her husband’s skin. Your player’s knight has Lustful 17. Call for a roll.

Your player may take certain precautions, if he sees the problem coming, but ultimately it’s about his character getting his head and slipping the reigns in situations like these.



I'd personaly never do that in a campaign of mine. There is a big diference between:

1) bumping Sir Firlefanz's lady wife, a powerful, irascible knight, that on top of it is witnessing his wife getting all hot about our young knight, and so predictably will probably lead to very nasty consequences, and

2) bumping the local tavern wench in a barn where no one will (presumably) notice.

In the first case it's not just Lustful behaviour, but downright Reckless at a 16 Lust Trait. The second is perfectly legitimate for a character at that Trait level. One of the reason's why Greg came up with Traits was to force, in a good way, consistent behaviour. But this isn't really consistent behaviour if you use an unmodified roll just because it's 16 or higher regardless of situation. Personaly I'd always bring situational modifiers into the decision (roll modifiers). I'd be totally pissed if I was playing in a campaign with a character with Lust 16 that bumps everything that moves as long as he thinks he has good chances to get away with it, and my GM didn't see any difference between the two situations I mentioned and just called for a naked Lustful trait roll for both.

But Your Pendragon May Vary and all that, so maybe I do things differently then most when it comes to traits. I personally prefer more GM judgment and things more granular and sensible, otherwise you're not really getting good consistent character behaviour at all, just consistent randomness based on arbitrary roll results and target numbers.

In general, this is how we use them:

1) Have a Trait 16+: You will do as the trait demands, UNLESS you ask for a roll. If your roll fails, congratulations, you may do as you wish. Otherwise, to act counter to your famous trait costs you an immediate point in the famous trait, or at the very least a check in the opposite trait.

2) Have a Trait 15+: You may choose to do as you wish. If you roll and succeed in your chosen trait, you will get a check. But if you roll and fail, you will then roll the opposite trait and if you succeed in that, that is the way the character wishes to go. Check the opposite trait. Crits and fumbles will of course force the character to act in a certain way.

Note that Lustful doesn't necessarely mean doing the deed there on the high table. It might be just flirting back a lot. Even a Lustful 16+ character would, in our games, manage to restrain himself under the gaze of the host to keep things innocent enough. Unless he is also Reckless 16+, in which case he might be a bit more careless. But if the character then gets a note/word from the lady for a midnight rendezvous in the garden... Well, Lustful 16+ & Reckless 16+ is already going and the Lustful 16+ character would be sorely tempted. I would allow fighting the impulse with Prudent, Amor, Love(Wife) or Hospitality.

I use traits mostly in opposed roles. The example given with the jealous knight I would have the PK roll chaste vs Lustful. He can (if he wants) to substitute the Chaste trait with another trait or passion. For instance he knows that the husband has a quick temper and is jealous, he may use prudent. He may claim that he is thinking about his wife a lot (than it would be Love(wife)). So even thou he is very lustful he may be also very prudent and will seek some discrete way to bed the wife, and will try to prevent the husband from knowing (so no flirting in the main hall).

I also only demand a roll when the situation requires it. In the example the wife is enticing the PK so that would require a roll.

Also I do not think that the lovebirds would have it during the feast on the high table in full view, although a lot of flirting van be done (inciting the temper of the husband no doubt).

Yeah, I think there many different ways to deal with traits. The last time I played KAP was ages ago so I don't remember fully what I used to do, but the rule of thumb is always to check what level you have in a trait and the situation itself. Opposed rolls are important, too.

And of course, I hope no one would think they would do it right there on the table. ::)

- If someone has a trait at 15 or under, he can act however he likes without rolling. He might roll if he wants to but such a roll won't give him an experience check.
Yes.
Basically, he doesn't feel strongly either way, but can do as he chooses

- With a trait value 16 or over, one must roll when under stressful or critical circumstances. On a critical he acts strongly in accordance with the trait, on a success he acts in accordance or could act opposite but must take a check on the opposite trait, on failure he must roll on the opposite trait and on a fumble he acts strongly in accordance with the opposite trait.
Right

So someone with Chaste 14 can be chaste all the time without a roll,
Circumstances might also require the character to undertake to roll whatever his Trait value might be.
For instance, the knights meet a trio of beautiful women in the middle of the wilderness, and the women attempt to seduce the knights with promises of food, water, and sex. The knight may be required to roll whatever his decision is.

but someone with Chaste 17
The high number defines his "normal" state, which is to be erotically active when presented with opportunity

under special circumstances might act opposite to his trait.
Normally he would have to roll, and fail
If a PC really really really doesn't want to succumb, the gamemaster may give him a break, but at the cost of a point. *

Or should a roll be required for high traits only when the player wants to act contrary to them during special circumstances?
This occurs, but is not the only time a roll may be required. See the example above of the women in the wilderness.
IMPORTANT: a roll is often modified. For instance, Sir Don't-touch-my-wife has a known reputation, or maybe his actions on the sport indicate his impending jealousy severe enough to soften any amorous urge. This would grant a negative modifier to one's Lust.

I use opposed rolls often too, perhaps the women's Lustful +?_ modifiers) versus the character"s Chaste.

Also, Lust/Chaste is an obvious use of the Trait rule. Use other Traits insimilar situations: knights attacking a 20' giant, knights allowing half the enemy column to pass by before attacking, etc.


*[This rules was written because some people don't want to play the game properly. I was loath to compel them when I wrote the rules. I am less merciful now. If a character collects Glory for a Trait, I now say that he must attempt a roll on the opposite trait. This stems from my desire to have actions with consequences. I would now say that if a player just refuses to act as his Traits demand, he loses all poins of that Trait to being him to 14--a number which gives no bonus]

IMPORTANT: a roll is often modified. For instance, Sir Don't-touch-my-wife has a known reputation, or maybe his actions on the sport indicate his impending jealousy severe enough to soften any amorous urge. This would grant a negative modifier to one's Lust.



Yeah, this was what I meant. Pfeww, for a moment I was thinking I was the only one who used roll modifiers to account for different situations!

- If someone has a trait at 15 or under, he can act however he likes without rolling. He might roll if he wants to but such a roll won't give him an experience check.
Yes.


So someone with Chaste 14 can be chaste all the time without a roll,
Circumstances might also require the character to undertake to roll whatever his Trait value might be.
For instance, the knights meet a trio of beautiful women in the middle of the wilderness, and the women attempt to seduce the knights with promises of food, water, and sex. The knight may be required to roll whatever his decision is.


Isn't this in contradiction with the first point above?

- If someone has a trait at 15 or under, he can act however he likes without rolling. He might roll if he wants to but such a roll won't give him an experience check.
Yes.


So someone with Chaste 14 can be chaste all the time without a roll,
Circumstances might also require the character to undertake to roll whatever his Trait value might be.
For instance, the knights meet a trio of beautiful women in the middle of the wilderness, and the women attempt to seduce the knights with promises of food, water, and sex. The knight may be required to roll whatever his decision is.


Isn't this in contradiction with the first point above?



I think the point is that under extreme circumstances, the GM can require a roll. So, with a chase of 14 you can always choose to turn down the lady of the manor because it is a 'typical' test of the trait. One woman, not crazy beautify, her husband might find out...But, three women, in the middle of nowhere, no one will know..a foursome...that is an unusual event and a test.

Similarly, all knights are generally valorous enough to take on even odds and mundane foes, but you might have to roll to fight a giant (that has a negative valorous modifier).

NT

- If someone has a trait at 15 or under, he can act however he likes without rolling. He might roll if he wants to but such a roll won't give him an experience check.
Yes.


So someone with Chaste 14 can be chaste all the time without a roll,
Circumstances might also require the character to undertake to roll whatever his Trait value might be.
For instance, the knights meet a trio of beautiful women in the middle of the wilderness, and the women attempt to seduce the knights with promises of food, water, and sex. The knight may be required to roll whatever his decision is.

Isn't this in contradiction with the first point above?

Yes, although I prefer to call it an exception, or even exceptional application.
It happens when there is a knightly test. It is a special occasion that occurs when magic is used, or exceptional people are present.
So when the lady brings out a decanter of the Best Wine in the World, everyone makes a roll, with modifiers

So when the lady brings out a decanter of the Best Wine in the World, everyone makes a roll, with modifiers


Oh boy, the memories. One of the best scenarios ever writen for Pendragon.