Lets talk about the higher grades of maintenance, especially with the relation to the new childbirth and NPC survival threads that Thijs and I have been talking about in the Play Aids -section, and brushed against here, too:
http://nocturnal-media.com/forum/index.php?topic=2431.0

The point is, those houserules eliminate the childbirth modifier and child survival modifiers, which were the main reasons my players were keen on maintaining a higher grade of maintenance from Ordinary. So I'd like to talk about how to entice them to cough up the hard earned loot to spend on lifestyle, rather than hoard it or use it for improvements or some such. Not that I really mind them doing that either, it is more of a question of giving them options.

If one were to follow Book of the Estate, this is pretty much a non-issue since the vassal knights are already at least Rich there, if not Superlative. So not an issue. However, our campaigns predate BotE, and switching midstream to £10 / manor model -does- have a significant impact on the economics:
BotM: knight + wife = £6, household knight + (experienced) steward = £6, 2 manors = £12 income - £12 expenses = 0.
BotE: knight + wife = £9, household knight + (experienced) steward = £6, 2 manors = £20 income - £15 expenses = £5 profit.
So I am not looking to switch to it any time soon.

So. The baseline is that all knights are Ordinary, even though the Conception and Survival rolls are more akin to Rich. One way of doing it would be to have negative modifiers for Ordinary knights, but that doesn't really fit the reality and I like those odds as they are. I don't want to 'callously' punish the PKs who are just Ordinary.

This is the idea that I have been toying with... the PK can splurge the money into Entourage members, who are useful in their own right, or into 'Displays of Wealth', i.e. better clothing, better food, etc., which nets him extra Glory and bonuses in the courtly occasions.

Displays of Wealth:
1) +10 Glory per £1 spent up to £10, after that +1 Glory per £1. (Note: This was called Conspicuous Consumption in BotM, where it was +1 Glory per £1, which was a bit too little to entice my players at all.)
2) +1 to courtly skills (those that can be modified by Glory) per full £3 spent. Maximum is +5 for £15 extra.
Note: The PK gets BOTH benefits for the money spent. If he spends £3 extra on Displays of Weath (i.e. the old Rich amount), he will get +30 Glory for the Year AND +1 to Courtly Skills.

Other 'money sinks':
- Hosting Events: hosting an event (feast, tournament) nets the host Glory as in Displays of Wealth.
- Needy family members (especially own children needing to be dowried or outfitted as knights, so some hoarding is very much understandable).

Useful Entourage members:
- Mistress: Low-born woman who has caught the Lord's (non-temporary) fancy. Bastard children!
- Clerk: Read Latin, never know when you might need to send a letter or have one read for you by a trustworthy person.
- Doctor: Someone with a high First Aid and Chirurgery can be a literal lifesaver! (In one campaign, the PKs pooled resources to hire a 'party healer'. In the other, the Lady character is the party healer.)
- Squire: Extra squires allow more squire rolls in battle, etc.
- Lady's Maid: Could give a small APP bonus for the Lady? (The 1d6+3 APP in BotM for a hairdressed is way too much, IMHO.) Maybe 1d6? That is already a potentially significant boost. Maybe 1d3+1? Nice to have, but won't be enough to make a pretty, average APP 14 lady into a great beauty APP 20+.
- Veterinarian: +1 to Horse Survival, pretty essential chap for anyone with finer horses than a Charger.
- Chaplain: The household priest. Could give a Religious check or a roll for a Pious check?
- Bard: Someone to sing and publicize your heroic quests. +20 Glory / year on a Successful Singing roll? (I am tempted to tie it into the amount of Adventure Glory (knights defeated, tournaments won, monsters slain, quests completed) gained in a year, instead, and allowing like +10% on a successful Singing roll. Yes, during some years, this can mean +100! It is a bit more book-keeping, but generally, the players OUGHT to be making notes to their history anyway, to show how much glory they are earning during each year and for what.)

What do you think? Suggestions?

Hi Morien,
we do think the same. :)
> BotM: knight + wife = £6, household knight + (experienced) steward = £6, 2 manors = £12 income - £12 expenses = 0.
Household is 4L, steward is 1L, so you keep 1 L

> BotE clearly states you only keep 2% in the end..., so 20L manors = .2L left...

Looks pretty consistent?

But I fully agree. I strongly dislike the current economy both BotM and BotE, certainly with different levels of maintenance.
While BotE is internally consistent, the moment you get large amount of ransom (how high is ransom with BotE rules??) the consistency breaks down.
Perhaps I speak too strongly, it's just not fully clear to me and that bothers me.
Either you micromanage (BotM + BofEntourage) or hand-wave (BotE).

Lets look at it meta-game wise
Extra money can either be:
waste on something non-useful (glory)
kept
spend on something useful (check skill or trait)
invested for future
give away (including family/sons)

In order for it to be a choice, the options must all be balanced..
There must a cap else Arthur gets every benefit known to men..

For me I dont want a list with 100 investments, because a player who invests will ONLY pick the best investment. It's already the fact he wants to invest that is enough for me.
If a player wants to spend it, I dont want a list with 100 spendings... etc
In the end I do would like a list with examples so I can 'explain' it or give it a background story.

So lets come up with rules for each of above options.

fg
Thijs

I like the 5 ways to spend money suggested to spend money.

Waste on something non useful would then be a display of wealth. I like the idea of +1 for courtly skills per 3 Libra. Not sure I like the +1 glory. Maybe a simple +1 per Librum spent would be interesting.

Kept would not yield any extra bonuses.

Spend on something useful. this would result in either an member to the entourage. Default would be a trainer. This could get a +1 to a skill the entourage brings in (example. A clerk would get a +1 stewardship). Every year you could get a check to the relevant skill as you watch over its shoulder.

Invest it. This can be linked to the investments to the manor as per BotM. You could also have the Hate(Landlord) reduced if enough investments are made.

Give away. either use the same rules as with display of wealth or get a check to a relevant trait or passion.

Besides this you could also have some rules when you either live above or below your station. In my game the PKs have become the officers of the Earl and as such were expected to live as rich knights. I would rule that in this case it would mean using it in displays of wealth in this case. Living below your station would incur a penalty to either honor or loyalty. Above would get a bonus glory or honor check.

> BotM: knight + wife = £6, household knight + (experienced) steward = £6, 2 manors = £12 income - £12 expenses = 0.
Household is 4L, steward is 1L, so you keep 1 L

BotE clearly states you only keep 2% in the end..., so 20L manors = .2L left...
Looks pretty consistent?


Experienced steward so skill 16+, so £2 / year. :)

And no, it is not consistent, as with 20L manor you ought to get 4-5 entourage members, too. The difference is that in BotE, those entourage members have already been selected for you and they don't actually do all that much for you, part of the streamlining the process. Anyway, this is a different discussion and one that I believe has its own thread somewhere before it petered out.

Ah, I see Cornelius posted, so I think I will end this one here and return to the main point, how to spend the money, with yours & his suggestions.

I like the 5 ways to spend money suggested to spend money.


Thijs did do well in distilling the different options, yes. :)



Waste on something non useful would then be a display of wealth. I like the idea of +1 for courtly skills per 3 Libra. Not sure I like the +1 glory. Maybe a simple +1 per Librum spent would be interesting.


It was +10 / £1 up to £10 in my suggestion. The point being that I have NEVER seen a player spend £1 to get 1 Glory. £1 to get a Generous check, yes. But that would be in the Give Away box. But if the exchange rate is 10 to 1, to start with, then I might see some players 'buying Glory', especially when combined with some sort of a skill bonus.

Note: Glory bonus to skills makes the actual courtly skill level almost insignificant, once the PKs start pulling +10 from Glory. In our campaign, high Glory helps you to get into situations where you get to attempt your skill to get some courtly glory, but it doesn't let you actually succeed in the skill roll, hence making the skill level itself important. And the above bonus from lifestyle.



Kept would not yield any extra bonuses.


Agreed. The advantage of course being that it is ready to make up for a bad harvest or raid damage or some such. Or waiting for a son/daughter to grow up.



Spend on something useful. this would result in either an member to the entourage. Default would be a trainer. This could get a +1 to a skill the entourage brings in (example. A clerk would get a +1 stewardship). Every year you could get a check to the relevant skill as you watch over its shoulder.


Fortifications could be quite useful, but as things currently stand, fortifying your manor house is something best left to estate holders (knight lords) or barons. The rest can't simply afford the cost of manpower & maintenance requirements, unless some serious investments have been made.

Not sure about the entourage members giving you skill bonuses... Well, I doubt it would be too unbalancing, but the way the entourage members currently work is that they cover up the gaps in the skill list of the character. So you could, for instance, hire a local wise woman (Folk Lore 5+2d6, Faerie Lore 5+2d6, First Aid 5+2d6, Chirurgery 5+2d6) to follow you around on quests so that you could ask her loads of questions pertaining to the peasants and the strange things happening, and having her patch you up when you get beaten bloody in combat. That is pretty useful, when you need it, but most players tend to neglect the Lore skills unless they are poked.



Invest it. This can be linked to the investments to the manor as per BotM. You could also have the Hate(Landlord) reduced if enough investments are made.


I like Book of the Manor investments, that give different trait checks. Still, I have noticed the same that Thijs commented on, that there seem to be 'favored investments' (Apiary, Dovecote, Fish Pond), and investments that almost no one builds.

Easy way?
£5 worth of investments produces £1d3 / year and cost to maintain is £1. Choose a trait to roll for a check.
£10 worth of investments produces £1d6+1 / year and cost to maintain is £2. Choose a trait to roll for a check.
£20 worth of investments produces £2d6+2 / year and cost to maintain is £4. Choose a trait to roll for a check.

The really easy option is to say that each investment needs to be £X (where X is either £5 or £10) and that is what you'll use. Of course you can go the BotE way and make the rolling go away. In that case, the 'canonical' return to investment value seems to be £1 profit for each £5 investment.



Give away. either use the same rules as with display of wealth or get a check to a relevant trait or passion.


Generous, Merciful, Pious and Love (Family) are pretty obvious to explain. Not sure I would give Glory for it, though. The player is already 'rewarded' with a check.



Besides this you could also have some rules when you either live above or below your station. In my game the PKs have become the officers of the Earl and as such were expected to live as rich knights.


I'd say that is the conspicuous consumption i.e. Glory and a court bonus. Not living as a rich knight... well, do they really have a choice? Tat extra 'salary' might come in the form of better clothing and a place at the Lord's table. Might be that they don't even get to choose, and if they do turn around and sell that clothing away, the Lord would justifiably be pissed at them. Selfish, - Loyalty, - Honor. After warning the players of the consequences, of course.

It was +10 / £1 up to £10 in my suggestion. The point being that I have NEVER seen a player spend £1 to get 1 Glory. £1 to get a Generous check, yes. But that would be in the Give Away box. But if the exchange rate is 10 to 1, to start with, then I might see some players 'buying Glory', especially when combined with some sort of a skill bonus.

Thats just brilliant, and I'm going to steal it right away. I like it extra much, since 1) I run a low Glory campaign (no Glory for Traits and Passions; short sessions) so this give my players a really good incentive to burn treasure and 2) I don't use BoM, Estate or Entourage, so there is little for my poor PKs to spend their ill-gotten means on.

I missed some:
Fortifications (though that falls under useful stuff, but we should separate it).
and Kept hidden vs Display

Waste includes feats/tourneys etc..

Giving away and getting a check makes it 'useful'..
Giving away gets you vague favors (just like in RL).

Waste: +10 Glory/1L
Kept Hidden: No bonus, increased chance Raid (exact chance TBD)
Display: 1Glory/1L, increased chance Raid (exact chance TBD)
Spend: 1 skill/trait/passion Check/1L
Fortifications: TBD (thats a whole book on itself)
Give Away: 1 Favor/1L
(gift-giving was common way to confirm mutual obligations)
1 Favor is a favor from a knight, a favor from an earl is much much more.. TBD
Investments:
short-term Low risk Get 1D2L in 5 yrs per L invested
short-term High risk Get 2D6-6L in 5 yrs per L invested
Long-term Low risk Get 1D6L in 20 yrs per L invested
Long-term High risk Get 2D20-10L in 20 yrs per L invested
[checks again under useful, not here]
Morien, can you double check these are reasonable investments...

Buy: See price list
Buy Granted Land: 20L gets you 1L [=long term low risk]
Buy Gifted Land: 10L gets you 1L [=long term high risk]
http://nocturnal-media.com/forum/index.php?topic=2297.msg17648#msg17648

fg,
Thijs

I like the 5 ways to spend money suggested to spend money.


Thijs did do well in distilling the different options, yes. :)


[/quote]
Thanks, I always try to bring choices/options down to their absolute (meta-game) minimal basics and then expand upon that.

fg,
Thijs

Investments:
short-term Low risk Get 1D2L in 5 yrs per L invested
short-term High risk Get 2D6-6L in 5 yrs per L invested
Long-term Low risk Get 1D6L in 20 yrs per L invested
Long-term High risk Get 2D20-10L in 20 yrs per L invested
[checks again under useful, not here]
Morien, can you double check these are reasonable investments...

Buy Granted Land: 20L gets you 1L [=long term low risk]
Buy Gifted Land: 10L gets you 1L [=long term high risk]


Let me first figure out what you are trying to suggest here... :P

Short term, low risk: So if I invest £5, I am getting £1d2 each year for five years? Or £5d2 at the end of the 5 years? I assume that it goes away after that, because otherwise this is superior to the Granted Land. £0.5 / year profit for a £5 starting capital vs. £1 / year profit for a £20 starting capital. Fields can burn although I guess investments could burn quicker.

Short term, high risk: Expected profit £0 after 5 years (since you have to take into account that you put £1 in, so if you get £1 out on average, that is 0 profit), but can be minus as well. There is very little incentive to prefer this over the low risk option, in my opinion.

Long term, low risk: On average, x2.5 profit in 20 years. However, then you realize that short term, low risk is actually making +50% on compound interest every 5 years => 5 times the principal amount in 20 years, with little risk attached, and better access on your assets, too (so x4 profit).

The long term, high risk seems like an excellent proposition. Its profit is on average £10 for £1 investment (x10). Invest the £20 for the grant money here, and you are very likely to roll in silver with your £200 after 20 years... And you can easily afford even more land after that, but why would you? Just reinvest, and by the end of the campaign, Arthur owes you money!

Buying land, in whatever form, becomes pretty much the worst way to invest here. You are getting your own back every 20 years, so your investment will grow x2 every 20 years (x1 profit, though).

Would one be an idiot to buy gifted land? In my humble opinion, yes. Sure, it is x2 profit every 10 years, but that pales to the short term investments. Also, the risk is that if you die in the middle, your family loses it all, which is not the case with the other investments.

You know what. I would rather do away with the whole investment idea. You want more income? Buy more (grant) land. End of story. Let the merchants worry about juggling investments, you are a knight! Furthermore, buying land is slow: the campaign is about 85 years, so that £20, assuming they get it within the first 5 years, it would have time to double 4 times. So up to £8 estate. Big whoop, as someone said.

However, the same with the long term, high risk... The guy would end up holding about £300000. Doesn't sound right to me... :P Even the long term, low risk would end up £3000 in the bank, if they started with £20. Short term, low risk: £13000.

I lost my old notes somewhere, so I went with memory. Thanks for checking, throw those investment suggestions out.

20L for 1L granted land
10L for 1 L gifted land
those should be our guide lines
Other investments should be 'worse'..
Everyone wanted lands, not apiaries...
But if no land available (most of time), you make worse investments..
So 5%/yr for low risk, 10% medium term low risk is upper limit.
high risk could more but also much less.
Keep paperwork to minimum so no yearly rolls.. Invest, write down year when investment should pay up (5 or 20 yrs later) and roll gained income [and hope you're still alive]
Low risk 5 yr (25%) (10L) : 10+1D3 (~20%)
Low risk 20 yr (100-200%) (10L) : 19+3D6 (~195%)
High risk 5 yr (10L) : 4D6 (~40%)
High risk 20 yr (10L): 4D20 (~420%)

Yes, this means that you invest 10L and after 5 yrs you get that 10L back and only 1D3 extra.. that ~5% per year, better than what we get from the bank these days...
All those BoM investments with 20% return... great investors in the middle ages..

fg
Thijs

Keep paperwork to minimum so no yearly rolls.. Invest, write down year when investment should pay up (5 or 20 yrs later) and roll gained income [and hope you're still alive]
Low risk 5 yr (25%) (10L) : 10+1D3 (~20%)
Low risk 20 yr (100-200%) (10L) : 19+3D6 (~195%)
High risk 5 yr (10L) : 4D6 (~40%)
High risk 20 yr (10L): 4D20 (~420%)


So the investments don't pay out if you die? That would be a significant disadvantage right there, although it is hard to see why anyone would make a deal like that. Especially a knight for 20 years.

These investments, especially the long term ones, seem more akin what you'd see in the age of exploration, with long distance trading and what not. Not in the dark ages Britain, or even in Arthurian High Medieval fantasy.

The high risk 20yr would pay out x311 the initial investment in 80 years (4 cycles). Assuming it pays to heirs, of course.
The low risk 20yr would pay out x76.
The high risk 5yr would pay out x218.
The low risk 5yr would pay out x18.
Land? The supposedly the best investment? x8 like stated earlier.
(Gifted land would come out to a pretty respectable x256, but there we KNOW that it goes away if the knight happens to die on an inopportune moment, say, right after putting all the money on a new gifted land.)

Here's what I'd suggest:
- Improve your land: Pay £20, +£1 income. No strings attached. It is yours & your family's until the line goes extinct.
- Buy a manorial estate (grant): Pay £60, income £6, but you'll have to come up with a household knight, too.
- Buy a manorial estate (gift): Pay £30, income £6, but you'll have to come up with a household knight, too.
(Of course, using BotE, those should be £100/£50 and income £10. Also, one should look at the actual expenses for running that second manor, since it makes a huge difference if the expenses are £4 from £6, or £4 from £10. Actually, double the BotE 'sale price', and it should about fit: £200 / £100. Of course, now no one can afford it anymore!)

No other investments whatsoever.

ADDED:
So doing a bit of cost-benefit analysis here (assuming £6 manor and £4 household knight):
1) Improve your own land: +£1 per £20, 'cheap' and no strings. Pays itself back in 20 years.
2) Buy a manorial estate (grant): +£2 per £60 at best, assuming it is nearby and your wife can look after both. In which case, it will pay itself back in 30 years and you are up one household knight, too! Need to come up with that £60 first, though, and find a Lord willing to sell.
3) Buy a manorial estate (gift): +£2 per £30 at best (see above). Pays itself back in 15 years, but risk losing most of the money when the buyer dies. Losing the household knight as well. Bit of an high risk investment.

So lets imagine what is the situation after 60 years of reinvesting, starting with £60:

1) Double the money each 20 years (x2/x4/x8), so £480 worth of land improvements making extra +£24 / year. So equivalent of four extra manors, no strings attached.

2) Double the money each 30 years (x2/x4), so 4 manors making £24 / year, requiring 4 household knights, and leaving (maybe) £8 / year in profits.

3) The big downside: each death zeroes the accumulated gift manors! Lets assume that they have gotten really lucky, and that the first guy lives 30 years and the second takes over then. The first guy starts with 2 gift manors, and then buys another 2 after 15 years. Thus, at the end of his life, he is holding 4 gift manors and 8*15 = £120 in cash. He croaks, happily not reinvesting the money. The gift manors go away, but his son buys them back with the £120. After 15 years, he can double it again to 8 manors, and at the end of 60 years, he has 8 gifted manors and 8*2*15 = £240 in cash, that he can use to buy 4 granted manors to leave to his son. So at the height of his power, he would have 4 granted manors and 8 gifted ones... Not bad. However, you may note that this relies heavily on no one dying out of place! If the first investor dies after 15 years, he has actually not made any profit, but leaves the family coffer with the starting £60. Even worse if he dies at year 16, after having bought two more gift manors, since that leaves the family bankrupt with £4 in the account!

So yeah, I think those seem to work nicely. Option 1 seems a bit superior to Option 2 at the end, BUT Option 2 comes with a household knight straight from the start, giving more political weight (2 manor knight vs 1 manor knight). Option 1 cannot even afford a household knight until 20 years, and that squishes the revenue stream to match Option 2, except Option 1 is 20 years LATER. I think those are nicely balanced, too. If one really wished to curtail Option 1 more, you could state that no manorial estate can generate more than £12 (double the starting value). That would mean that after the first 40 years, one would have to start looking for another place to put your money.

By the way, those were quick calculations. In actuality, all of them would grow faster as you can already buy/improve additional units and not have to wait for the full 15/20/30 year period.

Option 1: the initial investment of £60 to get +£3, you can buy it up to +£4 after 7 years, +£5 after 12 years and +£6 in 16 years (i.e. double every 16 years -> Option 1 has time to double one more time if we go to 64. -> equivalent of 8 manors.).

Option 2: The initial investment of £60 gets one manor at £2 / year. 30 years pass, a second manor is bought. Then 15 years pass, third manor is bought. 10 years pass (55 from the start), 4th manor is bought. 8 years pass (63 from the start), fifth manor is bought.

Option 3: Assuming that the death comes at the opportune time... Starting with 2 gift manors. After 8 years, third one is bought. 13 years, there are 4. 17 years, 5. 20 years, 6. And then lets coast for 15 years... money to buy those 6 back, so restarting at 35 years with 6 gift manors. 38 years, 7 gift manors. 40 years, 8. 42, 9. 44, 10. 46, 11. 47, 12. And then lets start buying 'grant' property. 50, 1 grant. 52, 2 grant. 54, 3 grant. 56, 4 grant. 58, 5 grant. 60, 6 grant. 62, 7 grant and 63, 8 grant. So 8 grant manors + 12 gifted manors at the 63 year mark (+£40 / year extra income and 20 household knights to boot...). Not bad. But again, assumes no one dies in the middle of it all...

Option 1 comes out a bit better out of this, and Option 3 is the high-stakes game. Not recommended for PKs, and I think it might be difficult to convince a lord to sell you all those 8+12 manors, too... I think I recommend limiting Option 1 to double the initial value. After that, you'll have to expand. It is still very good option for the PKs.

Option 1 (limited to £12 / manor):
- First 16 years -> boost to +£6.
- Next 10: Gather money for grant manor. Buy grant manor.
- +£8 / year. 3 years to +£9, 5 years to +£10, 7 years to +£11, 9 years to +£12, 11 years to +£13, 13 years to +£14 and reaching the limit (+£6 per manor and +£2 for the hhk manor).
- After 4 years, buy another grant manor.
- +£16 / year. 2 years +17, 3 years +18, 4 years +19, 5 years +20, 6 years +21, 7 years +22.
- After 3 years, buy another grant manor.
- 53 years spent. +£24 / year. 1 year +25, 2 years +26, 3 years +27, 4 years +29, 5 years +30 limit.
- 2 years and another grant manor.
- +£32 / year. 1 year +33, 2 years +35, 3 years +36, 4 years +38 limit.
= 64 years, +38 / year extra income, 4 extra grant manors (plus the own, inherited one), all fully improved.
We can see that this actually compares very favorably with Option 2, which has 5 extra manors and +£10 / year extra income. Granted, it took 26 years to get the first grant manor bought, which still gives Option 2 the political advantage at the start. Still, it might be necessary to raise the improve your own land cost to £30 for each +£1.

ADDED STILL SOME MORE:
So I dug out a spreadsheet to do it on that rather than in my sleepy sleepy brain:

1. Start with £60, blow it all on Improve Land -> 63 years later, +£53 / year income, £55 in the treasury.
2. Start with £60, Improve limited to +£6 / manor -> 63 years later, +£38 / year income, 4 extra grant manors, £42 in the treasury.
3. Start with £20, blow it all on Improve Land -> 63 years later, +£12 / year income, £26 in the treasury.
4. Start with £20, Improve limited to +£6 / manor -> 63 years later, +£10 / year income, 1 extra grant manor, £23 in the treasury.

What was the point of that? Just to show that if the PKs don't have huge wads of cash to put to investments straight off the bat, it is unlikely to become a big problem during the length of the campaign. Frankly, I would expect most players to put that £20 into better armor or something like that...


ADDED STILL SOME MORE (Additional things I didn't consider in above):

It would be easy to say that you can only make 1 Improve Land per manor per year. That would slow the big-budget start-up down a couple of years to start with, and a few years towards the high end. So probably end up with 3 grant manors and +£30 / year. Of course, with that income, it is 2 years per grant manor, if those are for sale. Of course, GM can easily say that they are not, end of discussion, or say that yes they are, but it is in another county. Complications with owing fealty to different lords, distance meaning you have to hire a steward there, which limits your own profit margin. And so forth. In fact, I'd probably start throwing problems at the PKs after the second manor already...

Of course, an even easier way to limit this would be to say that the improved estate is due for a re-adjustment after the death of the original vassal. Like if you have a manor that produces £12, the Lord wants 2 knights out of it. This would seriously impact the cost-benefit analysis, though, as suddenly you 'lose' 67% of your extra income into a household knight. At this point, the grant manors start becoming more attractive, as you basically get the same effect for £60 instead of £120.

And finally, it is unlikely to become a problem, if the PKs don't have £60 early on in the game. Or if they have other places they wish to spend the money on. The availability of grant manors is an easy way to limit them from 'breaking the bank'; the Lord might be offering gift manors instead.

With regards to the BotE manors, you probably do need more people there than the household knight. For instance, the lady of the manor does impact on the income of the manor in more ways than a steward would. One of my griefs with BotE is how annoying it is to do these kinds of adjustments. It is almost as if making sausages: the end result looks nice, but the process is somewhat messy. :P But if we assume that we want a Married Household Knight in there (a bonus for the hhk position) costing £4+£2 (or that £2 could go to seamstresses and weavers and such like), and assuming this would be enough, then the £4 / manor profit would indicate that £100 / £50 would work fine. That is £25 / £12.5 for each £1 profit, close enough to the 30/15. Not that I'd still expect a PK to go around with £100 in the pocket, but still... it would also make the grant manors a bit more affordable, as it would compare quite favorably with the Improve Land: £80 to get +£4 with improve land, £100 to get +£4 AND a married household knight with all the political increase in weight that implies.

quick point: 10L investment required not 1L, so all your payouts divide by 10.

But you're right, no mercantile investments..
+1L/yr for your manor for 20L

Buying grants/gifts should not be a default option, you need permission of the king for that...

> Of course, an even easier way to limit this would be to say that the improved estate is due for a re-adjustment after the death of the original vassal. Like if you have a manor that produces £12, the Lord wants 2 knights out of it.

According to Greg this is the case...
And now we understand why noone invests... Still for some people they would like to hold more knights as vassals.

ok:
Invest: +1L/yr for your manor for 20L

fg,
Thijs

quick point: 10L investment required not 1L, so all your payouts divide by 10.


Oh ye of little faith... I took that into account. :)

Start with £10:
long term, high risk: end up with £42 = investmentx4.2 every 20 years => 4.2^4 = 311 => starting with £10, you end up with £3110 in 80 years.



> Of course, an even easier way to limit this would be to say that the improved estate is due for a re-adjustment after the death of the original vassal. Like if you have a manor that produces £12, the Lord wants 2 knights out of it.

According to Greg this is the case...
And now we understand why noone invests... Still for some people they would like to hold more knights as vassals.

ok:
Invest: +1L/yr for your manor for 20L


Fine by me. With that little limit, we might make it a bit cheaper for the players, and still limit it to doubling the original manor cost.

So in which case, it would be:
Improve Your Land: +£1/yr for your manor for £10 (?).
- one increase per year per manor
- maximum to double the manorial income
- will be re-appraised by the lord when inherited

At £20, you need 20 years to get your own back. Which is pretty much saying 'I will never see this money', at least in our campaign the knights tend to die before their mid-fourties.

At £10, it is conceivable that you might actually garner some benefit from the investment within your lifetime. Depends a lot on the longevity of the PKs, I admit.

£10 for +1 -> 10 years = +2, 15 years = +3, 19 years = +4, 21 years = +5, 23 years = +6.
£20 for +1 -> double the above years (close enough).

Also, depends how 'harsh' the lord will be with the re-appraisal. I'd probably do it like this:
£1 = keep it (or if I feel very fiddly, 1 footsoldier for £0.5)
£2 = £1 extra (2 footsoldiers)
£3 = £2 extra (mounted sergeant)
£4 = £2 extra (mounted sergeant)
£5 = £3 extra (mounted sergeant and 2 footsoldiers)
£6 = £4 extra (household knight)

Why would you ever raise it to £6? Well, you do get the household knight out of the bargain, which is much better than a mounted sergeant with some footsoldiers. Also, you do get that extra £1 for your lifetime. (With BotE, I'd use a slightly different scale, of course.)

Depends a bit if you wish to encourage the players to do investments or discourage them?

Your lord willl re-appraise but you'll get the army for it back... (or the lords favor).
It should not be so attractive that everyone does it (with 10L for +1/yr, that's 10% so too good), but those with long term plan should..
BTW we should make this lower, like 10L for +.5L (because 20L might be bit much to cough up at once).

fg,
Thijs

Your lord willl re-appraise but you'll get the army for it back... (or the lords favor).
It should not be so attractive that everyone does it (with 10L for +1/yr, that's 10% so too good), but those with long term plan should..
BTW we should make this lower, like 10L for +.5L (because 20L might be bit much to cough up at once).


My worry is that with £20 for +£1, it is not attractive enough. Especially with the re-appraisal, which tends to halve the actual benefit (money-wise, I do admit that a bigger army is a benefit). With £10 for +£1, I am pretty sure that the players would be tempted, but they would stay on their toes for bad harvests (need to have some buffer). That's why I said that it depends if we wish to encourage players to do it or to discourage them.

I guess it depends how attractive the other options are. 20 checks or +£1/year? I think most of my players would go for the checks. 10 checks or +£1/year? Now that would be a tougher choice. Admittedly, 100 Glory (let alone 10 Glory) or +£1/year would not be a choice at all for most of them. We might have to increase the Courtly bonus a bit there, like +1 / £2, max +5. Now 100 Glory and +5 to the year's courtly events vs. +£1/year? Definitely a choice, especially during Pax Arthuriana, when you have plenty of tournaments and courtly events. Granted, 100 Glory and +3 Court vs. +£0.5 would probably be enough of a choice, too.

Frankly, what I would expect seeing with £10 for +£1/year is that people drop that money into improvement and then use the income to get an Entourage member or something like that. Well, depends a bit how deep a hole they have dug for themselves.

Yes, ok, 10L/ for +1L/year that makes it temptation..
No courtly bonus... If you want favor from Earl, then give him gift... and hope for favor. However if you want we can work out the details how much 'favor' you get for which amount... [but only after we agree on rest]

fg,
Thijs

Sure, if you want a favor from the Count, you'll need to earn it (or buy it).

However, what I am talking about here is a skill bonus, due to having a finer clothes than the average knight. Prettier plumage than the other strutting courtiers. Again, I doubt that even 10 Glory / £1 would be enough to tempt the players, but combine it with a smallish bonus to courtly rolls, and they might shell out some loot.

The investments to me was reading like Usury which is ok for Pagan knights but, I can see Christian knights getting in to trouble.