As mentioned in another thread (http://nocturnal-media.com/forum/index.php?topic=2441.msg18776#msg18776), I'd like some clarification about the Book of the Estate rules. First, let me state that I really like BotE. I love the concept of finding a way to provide massive amounts of depth and a strong historical feel without getting bogged down in minutiae. The book is gorgeous and the data inside of it is facinating. My comments are as a fan that wants to see this book be everything I think it can be, not as someone that doesn't like the book!

I think I have two core issues with the book as written today. First, I get the feeling BotE is creating a framework for a Pendragon economy (which is awesome), but this economy doesn't appear to be consistently applied, particularly in some of the examples. In many cases it feels like the economy is built "from the top down" where the examples are built to fit an end result, rather than "from the bottom up" where there are rules used to generate the example data and they happen to match up with the "top down" numbers. The "bottom up" approach is easier to tear apart (and therefore, to scale), so I'd love it if we could marry the two approaches up.

Second, for such a simple system, there is a *ton* of information in this book and all sorts of new terms that are confusing at first (render, assized rent, etc). Because of the volume of information, it is not immediately obvious how simple this system really is. Personally, I had to read the book cover to cover twice before I realized how simple a system it is, and based on anecdotal evidence from my PKs and other forum posts, this seems to be a somewhat common issue.

In short, I feel BotE as written today is a fantastic reference book if you as a GM play "fast and loose" with the rules, but I feel it could be improved as a rule book.

As a result, I would like to see the following:

A clear explanation of the foundations of the Economy. This could be as simple as a price sheet. This is what I meant from a "bottom up" approach to building the economy. I'd even be OK if the price sheet was listed as a percentage of total income, so long as it is consistently applied so that I can scale it across estates of any size.
Any "rules" or "exceptions" that should be followed need to be explained. The sample estates are *fantastic* and make my life as a GM much easier, but when my PK asks why estate #1 has a Steward and estate #2 doesn't, I need to be able to explain it.
A summary of the rules in "rules format" (rather than essay format) would be useful. My background is primarily with board games and computer strategy games. I've played a few role playing games over the years so I realize the need for more flexibility in the role playing rule set, but I think a simple rules summary (in one place!) could help players realize how easy and fast this system really is.


Now, on to some details. I'm just going through the book and writing out questions that I have. Some of these might be answered or obvious, but I figured there would be some value in documenting questions as they come up. I'm sure that if I still have these questions after 4 times reading this book, someone else probably has the same questions as well. :)

1. Clarify if 10 Libra Manors are "Estates" in BotE: One of the biggest sources of confusion that I have with BotE is that manors and estates are different types of holdings, but from a rules system perspective, if you are using the BotE system, it appears *all* holdings may be considered "estates" (from a rules perspective only). I think the confusion comes from pages 7, 9, and 13 where it defines the average monetary values of each type of holding. Originally, I was not applying any of the BotE rules to any holding that was less than 30 libra (the smallest estate described on page 7 and 13). Thus, I assumed that if one did not have a 30 libra estate, they did not have a "rich" standard of living, or follow any other "estate" specific rules. This is a big reason a lot of the math didn't make sense to me. If I say that the 10 libra manor is a "manor estate" and use the BotE rules, the math works better, but it doesn't match the "estates start at 30 libra" pricing given elsewhere. Clarification as to whether or not the 10 libra manor uses the "Estate" rules when using BotE would be appreciated. I *think* the answer is that everything you do with BotE uses "estate" rules, but I'd like to be certain.

2. Standard of Living: If I use the BotE rules for the 10 libra "manor estates", this means the starting Standard of Living (SoL) for PKs should be "rich" instead of "ordinary."

I think this was confusing for me for a few reasons.

I wasn't applying the "Estate" rules for the 10 libra manor as discussed above.
Page 3 describes the "standard manor" as providing 10 libra instead of 6, so I assumed that the "ordinary" SoL would follow the same ratio. I guess I just assumed that the default starting value of the manor increasing would *also* mean the starting value for the SoL increased as well. I didn't expect that using BotE PKs would get an automatic "free" bump up into the "Rich" category. Clarfication about this would be useful.
Using the 10 libra per manor system, I don't see how my PKs could afford 2 squires like KAP 5.1 describes in the "Rich" SoL. It also feels odd the PK's should get "free" glory each year, etc (KAP 5.1 page 157). In short, it just feels really weird to make the starting players live the wealthy lifestyle right out of the gate. It almost feels like the 10 libra "manor estate" is in a weird hybrid zone.


Perhaps some clarification about the Standard of Living with the 10 libra estate could help? If it really is the intent that PKs be "rich" at the start of the game (which I understand, being a land holder of a manor was a really big deal!) maybe just a brief explanation to that effect would be useful? Also, if they aren't expected to keep two squires that might need some clarification too. I'm totally cool with BotE replacing the rules of KAP 5.1, but if a rule has been replaced it would be good to clarify that.

In summary, a brief section on the Standard of Living, particularly for the 10 libra "manor estate" would be really helpful. I'm *still* not entirely sure I have this right. :)

3. Discretionary Cash should be consistent. If it's 2%, it should be 2% in all the examples. For example, on page 38 the discretionary fund is listed as being 0.85 libra, but it should be 0.2. Maybe the easy way to fix this is to not include discretionary income in the "budget" per se, and just say that the PKs get to "skim 2% off the top for free" so to speak. You just say "you get 0.2 discretionary income for every 10 libra", similar to how everyone adjusts for the loss of one or two lots of damage. Or just make the math work and add that .2 in somewhere! :D

4. Examples (page 38-43). HEEEELLLLPPP!!! This more than any other area is the part that is confusing me. Right now I'm just hand waving it and saying "this is what you get for your 10 libra estate" but it really bothers me that I can't figure out how to line all of this up with the rules.

First, it's called a 10 libra manor, but all the total expenses are 20 libra. How does this work exactly? At first I assumed it must be listing all of the expenses and income, which conveniently would equal 20 libra (10 income, 10 expense), but that math doesn't work out. There is clearly 20 libra of income and expenses. Next I thought maybe the 10 libra represents the income the PK would make from the estate for his own expenses, but that didn't work out either (Lord and Lady expenses on page 38 are 12.75 (corrected in errata to 12, not 10). Then I thought it was the cost of the PK by himself (without the cost of the wife), but that math doesn't work out either. What exactly am I looking at in these examples? What exactly does a "10 libra" estate mean? I have the same issue with the 50 libra estate (which has 100 libra in expenses), etc. I'm probably just missing something, but would appreciate some clarification on this!
Page 43 suggests that a Player (or GM I guess) can extrapolate from the samples to figure out the amount of expenses for manors of various sizes.This is useful, but all I know is how much I have "in the budget" to spend. I don't know what anything costs. I can try and extrapolate from the examples, but it's difficult because everything is sort of merged together. Perhaps this data in a different book that I don't own (Bot Entourage for example)?. I know that ultimately it doesn't matter because the income and expenses cancel each other out, but I'd like to be able to tell my PKs what they "get" as part of their estate. If the prices are listed in Book of the Entourage, it would be nice to have a note that says "if you want prices or details, see the other book").
Even if there were a price sheet, I am struggling to figure out exactly when it is expected that I add things. For example, when an Estate reaches a value of 20 libra, do I just look at the amount of money I get based on the percentages on page 43 and then simply "go down the list" of Duties in the order listed on page 30 (starting with a Steward, then a Constable, then the Major Domo, etc)? Can PK's pick and choose how they want to spend that income so long as they stay within the "budget" on page 43?


5. Additional manors. The way I have been trying to use the BotE is that if/when the PKs gain additional estates, they just add value to the PK's primary estate. This reduces paperwork and speeds gameplay. Thus, if a PK has 3 manors, it is treated as 1 30 libra estate, rather than 3 separate 10 libra estates. Things brings up a number of questions:

First, is this even the right way to do things. Would it be more appropriate to have 3 separate 10 libra estates?
Assuming it's OK to combine them, how do they merge together? Do I need a Steward now? When do I split up my Kitchen staff to Kitchener, Larderer, and Hunstman? When do I need to start assigning titles? Said differently, when do I manage things like a single estate instead of 3 separate manors? What advantages are there to the player for doing this?
Assuming I begin gaining holdings all over Logres, to keep things simple do I only track raids on my primary holding? Do I determine the value in lots of each of my holdings and then assign damage in percentage from there? Is this yet another reason to keep those holdings as separate estates?


6. The early game "footman and garrison" exception. Page 36 says we don't need to pay for footmen and garrison infantrymen in the early phase. Does this mean that a 10 libra estate will cost MORE in the mid and late game phases? Does it mean that Knights cost more in the early game phase? I understand wanting to match with history here and perhaps this requirement doesn't match the time periods represented in the early eara, but this is an area I would GLADLY choose gameplay consistency over historical accuracy. Either that, or perhaps a statement explaining that although it isn't required in the early game phase, the costs are the same in all eras (similar to how PKs still have to pay for the Wife's expenses even if they are not married). I like the 1 knight and 2 foot soldiers per 10 libra rule. This is easy for me to understand and keep track of and scales nicely. If I sub-enfeoff, it doesn't break anything. If I add new manors, it doesn't break anything. I like the consistency here. :)

7. Raids. For the most part I really like the raiding rules, the concept of "lots" of damage, etc. I did have a few questions, but am not certain that these need clarification. This could be user comprehension errors on my part. :o

As discussed earlier, if I have multiple holdings in different territories, how do I determine the effects if just that single holding was raided?
Is there any advantage to building defensive structures to help prevent raids? Obviously I know the impact if I run an adventure to defend against the raid, but outside of an adventure/siege/battle is there any reason for a PK to build defensive structures? Said differently, are there any rules that say "if you have a defensive value of x you can reduce the likelihood of being raided" or something like that?
As discussed elsewhere, explanation that the "temporary" and "permanent" lots are not meant to be totaled together (temporary is what you loose that year, permanent is what stays "broken" until repaired) would be useful.



8. A Rules summary. As I understand the BotE system, it's pretty simple. You calculate out the total value of your holdings (this is the "Assized Rent right?"), figure out "how you are spending your money" using the data on page 43, and then figure out "what you get" based on those values (this is where Book of the Entourage becomes useful). After this you add up all of your investments and subtract any "damage in lots." From here you calculate your discretionary income, and then you can spend that income on repairs, new improvements, feasts, clothes, etc. It's SO simple, but with all of the terms like "render", "assized rent", and "outliers" being thrown about, it seems a lot more complicated than it really is. I think a 1/2 page summary "putting this all together" would help people see how easy and fast this system really is!

I am sorry about the length. I really like the concept of this book and any way that we can clarify it (or at a minimum, help me understand how to use it as written :o) would be appreciated. I *don't* want to get into the "game of spreadsheets" like Book of the Manor (I love the speed and theoretical scalability of the BotE rules), but I would like a little more help on how to appropriately scale the system. I think it's really close, but I just haven't quite been able to "get it." :D

Don't be sorry about the length. You managed to hit almost all the points that have been bugging the heck out of me when it comes to BotEstate. You only missed on the multiplicative value added of the ladies and the armourer, which really, really bugs me about the economical system of BotE. Fortunately, I can just stick my fingers into my ears and go lalalalalala about where the income comes from... :D

The Estate Personnel starts bugging me when I add manors together, too. Surely you would need bailiffs at ALL the manors, or otherwise those lazy peasants won't work, etc. If the estate is reasonably geographically compact, then yes, I can understand how you might just rove around your manors like an itinerant court. But what if you have estates all over Logres?

What I would have personally preferred... Have the £10 libra estate be £10 income in excess of the ordinary manorial staff. This is the money you will use to hire the household knights or to support your own family & special entourage members. But alas, that was not how the thing was patched together...

It would be nice to have some rules about the knight-stewards and the other knight-officers, especially the married ones. There doesn't seem to be any rules why the £50 estate for example has to have married knight-stewards. And what mechanical benefits this has for the PK? What penalties if he decides to skimp on it and just have regular bachelor knights? Etc. I guess that is pretty close to what you said about having a system you can build "bottom up", which is the way most campaigns go (the PKs accumulate manors one by one, to add to their original inherited manor).

Holy smokes, that's a lot of great feedback, lucky thirteen! Thanks, and have some Glory!

I don't have time to digest and respond to all of this right now, because I'm trying to focus on finishing the, Book of the Warlordbut rest assured, we will be revisiting this when it comes time to do the errata. I will say that some of the issuers you're surfacing may be beyond the scope of a simple errata, but if some of you math fiends want to work on it and explore some solutions here, it will certainly make it easier for us to process everything and make some decisions when it comes time to address them — probably later this year).

I will say that the 10£ manor in ESTATE is not classified as an Estate, but rather our attempt to make the £10 manor function within the Estate economic model. There may well be some details that slipped by us, though I can assure you we went through the examples very carefully three or four times. But, despite our best efforts, things may not align 100%, you're right. I can only say that Greg is very much in the hand-waver camp — more concerned about story and narrative than making sure everything is airtight with the models. I, on the other hand, am much more in your camp. The thing should make sense internally and be scalable. That was certainly our intent, and to the extent we weren't completely successful— well, we'll will try to remedy it in the next update. To the extent the community can help us sort out the particulars, this will make it all the easier for us to issue these corrections and keep our other projects (new books!) moving along.


Best,


T.

Please focus on the Book of the Warlord. I can't wait! That is a day 1 purchase for me.

In the meantime I'll see if I can re-work some of the example estates and come up with possible entries for the columns on the side (the red text) that could fit on a few of these pages. I think between sample changes and additional "red" text we could get a lot closer to what I am suggesting with minimal changes to the layout. I was going to basically do this anyway for my house rules so it is no extra effort on my part. I'll post it here when I am done for feedback. :)

Also, if anyone happens to have the answers for some of these questions please let me know. Even if we don't see big changes I would appreciate the clarification. 8)

Best patch that I can come up with right now for the £10 manor is the one I suggested in the other thread: Add the 3 spearmen in (2 field army + 1 garrison).

1) Add 3 spearmen to Army (Cost £1.5)
2) Add £0.15 "Army maintenance" to expenses. (Cost £0.15)
3) Take £0.65 off Discretionary funds. (Pays for the Army maintenance and 1 spearman.)
4) Lower the Standard of Living entry of the Knight and the Lady by £0.5 each. (Each pays for 1 spearman, so the books balance again.)
5) Bump the Chaplain into the Servant staff.

=> You have a nice scalable £10 estate that provides 1 knight + 3 footsoldiers as it should, the discretionary funds are £0.2 (2% of £10) as they should be, AND the Knight + the Lady and their closest servants (Squire, Handmaiden and Nurse) cost exactly £10, which happily is the label that has been applied to this £10 manor that produces £20 and spends £20...

Oh, and explicitly note that the £10 manor vassal knight is the typical PK, who gets now Rich maintenance.

I vote that next time you want to come up with solutions for economy rules you enlist Morien into the team. It will avoid you (and other players) a lot of headaches.

I vote that next time you want to come up with solutions for economy rules you enlist Morien into the team. It will avoid you (and other players) a lot of headaches.

Agreed
and it is already so
although we're done with that economic stuff

I have been trying to create some alternate versions of the spreadsheets for the sample estates that both use Morien's numbers as a foundation and scale easier. A few questions for the group:

The easiest way I have found to scale this is to lump all of the costs for the Lord, Lady, Courtiers, Household Knights, and Officers together into one category named "Personnel." You just say that the PK must spend the mandatory 10 libra on the Lord, Squire, Lady, Handmaiden, Nurse, and their SoL and anything left in this category can be spent on other Personnel.
For the 10 libra estate, the required purchases equal 50% exactly (thanks to Morien's numbers). This means we can basically say that the "10 libra" description means all the money the PK has to spend after estate expenses and the army have been paid for.
Scaling this out, the 20 libra estate would have 20 libra to spend on "Personnel", the 50 libra would have 50 to spend on "Personnel", etc.
The current sample estates seem to imply an increase in expenses for "goods" as the estate grows in size, possibly to prevent PKs from having excessive amounts of Personnel, or perhaps just to "balance the books." I have tried to come up with an official scale for the "goods" expenses in the existing samples but it doesn't appear to be a formula. I was thinking it could just make the goods go up 1-2% per 10 libra if we want to control the amount available to spend on "Personnel" to make it more closely match the existing ratios.
It is entirely possible to break "Personnel" into sub categories and maintain the same ratio if you want it to be more granular, but this take more work.


So what I am leaning towards right now is that "Personnel" starts at 50% and goes down a few percentage points every 10 libra, goods (and possibly common servants) go up every 10 libra (to match the spirit of the existing samples). We figure out that ratio, then provide sample estates to speed gameplay. When between steps (for example, at 20 or 30 libra) PKs should select Personnel of their choice from the sample estates for the next value up (20 or 30 estates would pick from the 50 libra sample, 60 or 70 from the 100 libra, after that PKs choice). Just as the cost for the Lord's wife must be paid even if he is unmarried, the Wife of officers must also be paid for, unmarried or not. The "Standard of Living" will be the easiest number to tweak to make the percentages match. It doesn't seem that it would make a huge difference so long as we make it something PKs can "buy."

Does this seem 1) reasonable and 2) within the spirit of the existing samples? If so I can work up some samples to look at.

Could be way off base and outside the scope of errata too of course. Worst case, if this works but we can't get it in the BotE errata I can use it for house rules. 8)

Well, on a quick glimpse on the examples given...

The "estate value = Lord's Household + Courtiers" is actually a very good 'rule of thumb'. The £100 estate seems to use about £90 to those two categories.

If you want to break it down further, the Lord's Household seems to be about £10 + £2 / extra £10. Which makes sense. Better horses, better clothes, more servants around, etc.

However, this doesn't actually tell you what personnel you actually need, apart from the need to have a knight / £10. This is made even more complicated as the wives of the household knights work as ladies-in-waiting. How many of those do you actually need, etc.

Yes, that is exactly the conclusion I came to. The "pick from the next sample and always pay for the wife" rule was my attempt to solve the "what do you need when" issue.

So let's say a PK gets his 2nd manor and now has 20 libra. He pays for his goods, common servants, Lord's household, and army (army always only ever being the soldiers, Knights and Officers go in the "Personnel" category) and then can spend what is left on his choice of "Personnel" from the sample 50 libra estate, always paying for a wife and officer/servant together when possible.

I think that would work, generally.

Looking quickly over the prepared lists, it seems that:

For every (extra) £10: 2 extra grooms (£0.5) and a household knight with a squire (£4), +£1 for administrative staff, +£1.5 for the Lord's Household (I am taking the professional entourage members out and adding them to the courtiers, hence lower value here).
For every £30 (of the total value, round halves DOWN): Upgrade one household knight to a married knight-officer (+£2 wife)
For every full £50 (of the total value): +£1 to the standard of living of the knight officer.

It is not exact, but it seems to work within a margin of error to interpolate between £10 estate and a £100 one.

£10: The original manor. Use the baseline.
£20: 2 extra grooms, 1 hhk+squire, 1 clerk, £3 to spend on other personnel.
£30: 4 extra grooms, 1 hhk+squire, 1 married knight-officer + squire, 2 clerks, £4 to spend on other personnel.
£40: 6 extra grooms, 2 hhk+squire, 1 knight-officer + squire, 3 clerks, £7 to spend on other personnel.
£50: 8 extra grooms, 2 hhk+squire, 2 k-o (+£1 sol) + squire, 1 major domo (£2) + 2 clerks, £6 to spend as you wish. (Small slump, but you do get an additional £2 lady in waiting, so no biggie.)
£60: 10 extra grooms, 3 hhk+squire, 2 k-o (+£1 sol) + squire, 1 major domo (£2) + 2 clerks + almoner, £9 to spend on other personnel.
£70: 12 extra grooms, 4 hhk+squire, 2 k-o (+£1 sol) + squire, 1 major domo (£2) + 3 clerks + almoner, £12 to spend on other personnel.
£80: 14 extra grooms, 4 hhk+squire, 3 k-o (+£1 sol) + squire, 1 major domo (£2) + 4 clerks + almoner, £12 to spend on other personnel.
£90: 16 extra grooms, 5 hhk+squire, 3 k-o (+£1 sol) + squire, 1 major domo (£2) + 5 clerks + almoner, £15 to spend on other personnel.
£100: 18 extra grooms, 6 hhk+squire, 3 k-o (+£2 sol) + squire, 1 major domo (£2) + 5 clerks + almoner, £15 to spend as you wish.

Or to summarize:
Estate value: Available for hiring other professionals (entourage).
£10: £0
£20: £3
£30: £4
£40: £7
£50: £6
£60: £9
£70: £12
£80: £12
£90: £15
£100: £15

Or if quick and dirty is your style:
15% of the Estate value (if larger than £10) = Resources available for hiring entourage members (PK's choice).

The point is that it should be used for hiring, not for hoarding or investing. Your household will look below the norm without it.

Admittedly, I'd be tempted to say 10% of the Estate and the first person hired is the Nurse. :P This accounts for the need to scale up and have sergeants commanding the foot soldiers, and a professional armourer instead of trusting on the blacksmith. I.e. the 'tail' (not really, as it includes the +£0.5 to the sergeant too) of the army grows from 10% of the army in the case of £10 manor to about 25% of the army in £100 estate. Not to mention that it is easy to calculate and reins in a bit the number of entourage members that the PKs get. So yeah, I am totally fine 'ruling' that:

10% of the Estate value = resources for hiring extra entourage (the Nurse in £10 manor counts as entourage: if you don't have kids yet, pick another entourage member instead).

Everyone happy with that?

EDIT:

Or to rephrase it:
Every extra £10 of the estate beyond the first £10: Pick a £1 entourage member.

So to restate (to ensure I "get it"). The objective here is to "hand wave" (build in the models) all the non-gameplay impacting aspects of the estate into the samples, freeing the PKs up to make decisions only on things that actually impact them (have a gameplay effect). To accomplish this, the following rules are used:

All estates are staffed per the model Morien listed above.
Estates require 1 Knight, 2 footmen, 1 garrison per 10 libra.
PKs get 1 Entourage member (player's choice) for every 10 libra.


We could include Morien's detailed explanation for the 10, 50, and 100 Libra estate samples (like the current BotE), and then break out full samples for all steps in between (as Morien posted above) on Greg's website or something like that as a supplemental play aid.

This model answers every single issue on my list with one exception. There is gameplay impact for the Standard of Living for each category of personnel (Lord's Household, Army, Courtiers, and Servants). This is used for covering shortages. Using the above concept I imagine we would need a model for when to increase the SoL for each category.

Other than that, I think it covers everything. I want to actually implement it in a few samples to ensure they match the "spirit" of the existing samples but i am guessing it will work just fine. I really like this. Thanks Morien!

All estates are staffed per the model Morien listed above.
Estates require 1 Knight, 2 footmen, 1 garrison per 10 libra.
PKs get 1 Entourage member (player's choice) for every 10 libra.



Exactly right.

With a note that for the normal £10 manor, the first entourage member is the Nurse.



Using the above concept I imagine we would need a model for when to increase the SoL for each category.


Well, we know from the above calculations that, using the KAP SoL system:

The £10 manor knight starts off as Rich.
Every extra manor contributes £1.5 to the standard of living (more servants, better SoL)
Superlative is +£3 to Rich.


So 1+1=2, having £30 estate means that the PK is living off as Superlative.

As you no doubt have noticed, Thijs and I have been making new childbirth and survival tables, which would do away with the SoL bonuses to those. Of course I agree that there needs to be some kind of benefit.

In my SoL suggestion, it is simply 10 Glory for each extra £1 spent on lifestyle... So the 1-manor knight would get 30 Glory extra and each subsequent manor would add +15 to it, up to 100. Now this might be too much. Especially as it is combined with the Landholding glory... Might be a better idea to do away with the Landholding Glory? That would give a game mechanic reason to keep up the high lifestyle. So that is the 'carrot'. The 'stick' is the Honor penalties that a nobleman who 'slums it' will endure, as Greg has mentioned.

I like where this is going. Fantastic work you guys/gals are doing here. Kudos, have some Glory!

Well, we know from the above calculations that, using the KAP SoL system:

The £10 manor knight starts off as Rich.
Every extra manor contributes £1.5 to the standard of living (more servants, better SoL)
Superlative is +£3 to Rich.


So 1+1=2, having £30 estate means that the PK is living off as Superlative.


What I am missing is how to determine when the other categories (Army, Courtiers, and Servants) adjust their SoL (if they do at all) and how it relates with the rules for shortages on page 47 of the BotE.

What I am missing is how to determine when the other categories (Army, Courtiers, and Servants) adjust their SoL (if they do at all) and how it relates with the rules for shortages on page 47 of the BotE.


Who is 'they' in the above? I already included an approximation when the knight-officers get SoL bonus? But if you are using the simplification 10% of the estate label value to entourage, then you don't have to worry about it. The SoL of the Lord & the Lady doesn't depend on the other categories at all. It is counted separately.

I forget how the shortage rules go... If I remember correctly, it is what happens when someone trashes the estate, and the income is damaged? Lots damaged and so forth?

If I understand the rules correctly, SoL must be adjusted as you take lots of damage. This appears to be the primary impact to the PKs from taking damage to the estate.

If the estate is short by:
◆ One or two Lots, then everyone shares in
the shortage, with no diminishment of
Maintenance
◆Three Lots, then the Lord and Lady drop
to Ordinary
◆ Four Lots, then the Domestics drop to Poor
◆ Five Lots, then Courtiers drop to Poor
◆ Six Lots, then Lord and Lady drop to Poor

And so on and so forth.

What is not clear to me is if the SoL changes for the Army, Courtiers, and Domestics as the SoL changes for the PKs. Thus, if the PKs reach Superlative, can the Domestics ever reach "rich" for example. Also, would this even matter from a gameplay perspective. If the PKs reach Superlative and are forced to downgrade to "Rich" due to loss of lots, they would mechanically have the same loss of honor, etc for maintaining a "Rich" lifestyle so the easiest way I see to approach it is to make the whole thing scale up when the PKs scale up. Or you could argue a domestic would never have a "rich" SoL so again, mechanically nothing would change.

What is not clear to me is if the SoL changes for the Army, Courtiers, and Domestics as the SoL changes for the PKs. Thus, if the PKs reach Superlative, can the Domestics ever reach "rich" for example.


No. You don't pay your servants better, you just hire more of them. The Knight-Officers do get an upgrade in SoL, as noted. The first +£1 is not enough. But the +£2 would bump them to Rich (handwaving that a bit, as they are only at £8 for the family, which is not Rich yet)?

Simple system:
Use the lots as in BotE. It actually scales down to £10 alright. 3 lots = £3. £9 - £3 = £6 = Ordinary SoL. However, it seriously doesn't work for £100 estate; that is -£30, which is more than the Lord's Household is spending, total! But if you are willing to handwave a bit, say that everyone is tightening the belt a bit while the Lord is tightening a lot...

Complex system:
This would require you to actually calculate how much money you have to make up for. Which, like I said, will not work too well for large estates. I'd have to calculate more here.

Honor Loss:
If your SoL is compromised due to harvest or raid, you do not lose Honor, since you simply can't afford it. It is different when you are cheap on purpose.

So in summary, with the simple system you just leave everything except the Lord's SoL as written and it does not change regardless of the size of the estate. That is how I was leaning but wanted to make sure I was not missing anything. I think that addresses all of my confusion. I will spend some time on some sample estates and see how those turn out. I am really liking this. I feel it matches the spirit of the existing rules with better internal consistency. I appreciate the work!

So in summary, with the simple system you just leave everything except the Lord's SoL as written and it does not change regardless of the size of the estate.


Yes. And glad to be helpful. :)

Note that those raids and lots of damage need to influence the whole of the estate, if it is a bigger one. Otherwise, you'll have to scale it to match the whole estate.

For example, lets assume a £100 estate, and one of the outlying £10 manors gets attacked by the Saxons. Since the raid is influencing only one manor, even if it gets flattened pretty much totally, it still rounds to an only 1 Lot in the whole estate value. In other words, the other, unraided parts of the estate are able to take up the slack and make good of the damage.

Another point that I made earlier, but bears repeating here... About sub-enfeofing the manors. If you sub-enfeof or already have enfeoffed vassal knights in your estate, you treat your estate as if those vassal knights were fully independent as far as your court and lots of damage and so forth are concerned.

To give an real example, lets say that your £100 estate consists of £50 demesne estate (i.e. under your direct control) and 5 vassal manors of £10 each. In this case, you will actually treat your estate as a £50 estate in pretty much all respects, except for the Army. For the Army, you will be able to summon those 5 vassal knights and their 10+5 spearmen to complement your demesne army of 1+4 knights + 10+5 spearmen. (Like Greg said, there is a good reason why you don't sub-enfeof your lands, unless someone really, really deserves it!) If those vassal manors get raided and they suffer damage, that doesn't influence your court. Of course, you should be offering protection to those vassals, and if you are in a Generous mood, you might even contribute some money to help in making up for the damage, but you don't have to.

I'll need to think about the complex system of shortages a bit more. I am not sure it is really really worth it, but I would like to find a way to scale it a bit smoother. I'll do another post about it when I have something ready.

Alright. This isn't exact, but it gives a bit more of the gradation at the start.

Starting assumption:
£10 estate/manor starts with £9 in Lord's household expenses, and each additional manor adds £1.5.

So we'll get:
Ordinary = £6 (0 Glory)
£10 = £9 (Rich, 30 Glory)
£20 = £10.5 (45 Glory)
£30 = £12 (Superlative, 60 Glory)
£40 = £13.5 (75 Glory)
£50 = £15 (90 Glory)
£60 = £16.5 (105 Glory)
£70 = £18 (120 Glory)
£80 = £19.5 (135 Glory)
£90 = £21 (150 Glory)
£100 = £22.5 (165 Glory)
(Remember, the actual SoL annual Glory is capped to 100.)

If the estate is short by...
One Lot: No Discretionary Income, servants tighten the belt. Knight-officers lose £1 of their extra SoL. Gain only 2/3 SoL Glory
Two Lots: Gain only 1/3 SoL Glory. Knight-officers lose their extra SoL entirely.
Three Lots: No SoL Glory, Lord becomes Ordinary SoL.
Four Lots: Domestics drop to Poor.
Five Lots: Courtiers drop to Poor.
Six Lots: Lord drops to Poor.

Calculate the Lord's current SoL from the SoL Glory he is gaining this year:
0 - 29 = Ordinary
30-59 = Rich
60+ = Superlative

For example, a Lord of £70 estate, 120 Glory:
0 Lots of shortage: 120 Glory capped to 100 Glory, Superlative SoL
1 Lot of shortage: 80 SoL Glory (uncapped), Superlative SoL
2 Lots of shortage: 40 SoL Glory (uncapped), Rich SoL
3 Lots of shortage: 0 SoL Glory, Ordinary SoL

In addition, lose 1 entourage slot (£1) per a Lot of damage.

Note:
The PK Lord, if he has income from ransoms or treasure, he can make up for these 'economies'. Easiest way is to allow him to pay the Entourage from 'his own pocket' and make up for the SoL Glory loss at 10 Glory / £1. If this 'corrects' his SoL to the next category, great. In the example, with 2 Lots of shortage, if the Lord pays £2, he can push his lifestyle back to Superlative (SoL Glory 40 + 20 = 60) for that year.

(If someone was reading this while I was editing, sorry about that! I made a mistake of posting a bit too early and the had to edit it 'on-screen'.)

Note:
The PK Lord, if he has income from ransoms or treasure, he can make up for these 'economies'. Easiest way is to allow him to pay the Entourage from 'his own pocket' and make up for the SoL Glory loss at 10 Glory / £1. If this 'corrects' his SoL to the next category, great. In the example, with 2 Lots of shortage, if the Lord pays £2, he can push his lifestyle back to Superlative (SoL Glory 40 + 20 = 60) for that year.


A harsher rule would be that the Lord needs to 'buy back' the whole Lot. I can see it being argued that the servants & courtiers get a bit resentful if the Lord is going on like nothing is happening while asking them to tighten the belt.

In addition, lose 1 entourage slot (£1) per a Lot of damage.


I was obviously considering the £100 estate here. It should read either:
1) Lose 10% of your entourage slots per a Lot of shortage.
or
2) Lose 1 entourage slot for every £10 shortage.

Thus, if you have £100 estate and 10 entourage slots, each Lot of shortage (£10) causes you to lose 10% (1) entourage slot. If your estate is £50, you'd have to get 2 Lots of shortage before you lose an entourage slot.

Working on putting this all in Excel and comparing it with the current rules. It's a slow process, *lots* of data. I hope to post it all today.

It gives me new appreciation for the work that went into this book. :o

Okay, a little feedback/discussion based on my work in the spreadsheets.

1. I purchased Book of the Entourage in the hopes it could provide some clarity. I was sort of hoping it could act as a "price sheet" of sorts. It's an interesting book, but not quite what I was hoping for this particular project. However, I do think it will help a little.

2. The problem I am running into is that there are several "Professionals" (Entourage members with one primary skill) listed in the Book of the Entourage (BotEnt) and Book of the Estate (BotEst) that would be entirely appropriate from a historical context, but almost useless from a gameplay perspective. A good example is the Chef. Why would a player ever want to purchase one instead of another soldier or squire? One strength of the current BotEst rules are that the preset sample estates "include" these "useless" professionals, giving the PK's Entourage a more historical mix of followers.

3. The concept of "Entourage slots" is better for gameplay (PKs have more choices!), but I can't see why on earth they would voluntarily choose some of these followers. Along the same lines, I would imagine the PKs would want to spend as many of their "slots" on followers that can help their PKs, rather than their wives (or vice/versa if playing the Lady). I'm just wondering how to prevent these slots from being abused. Do we even care?

One possible alternative solution is to list out pre-made Estates with these "slots" already filled so that they are appropriate for the era. Said differently, we still use the "Entourage slots" concept, but rather than allowing PKs to choose their members, those members are assigned.

For example:

£10: Nurse
£20: Huntsman
£30: Lady's Professional (Lady's Choice)
£40: Healer (Player's Choice)
£50: Major Domo

And so on. This system comes at the cost of player choice, but it seems to match the spirit of the BotEst a bit more closely. The issue we will likely run into with this approach is that the sample estates provide more "professionals" than there are "Entourage slots."

Thoughts? Not sure the right direction to go here.

Well, if you look at the £50 estate, it has:
2 Lord's entertainers
1 Lady's professional
Nurse
Healer
(I consider the Lawyer & the Major Domo to be administrative and the Huntsman to be an ordinary servant, not an entourage member.)

So that is five slots, three of which are by choice. So it would be enough to nail the Healer down, if you really wanted to.

For £100 estate:
Valet
2 Entertainers
2 Professionals
Nurse
Healer

Here we have fewer 'entourage members' than you'd expect. I'd be tempted to claim those second squires of the knight-officers as extra entourage members, as I do not account for them anywhere else. Then it would match again, more or less (+Assistant Nurse, who is not a full-fledged £1 entourage member).

I agree that you could argue that the entertainers and the professionals are not really 'free' picks, as they are limited to the category.

Speaking of extra squires, by the way:
£10: 1 squire
£50: 2 squires
£100: 3 squires

It is clear that the 1 squire + 1 Rich + 1 Superlative doesn't work. I'd change it to +1 'free' squire / every £6 extra SoL. In other words:
£10-£40: 1 squire
£50-£80: 2 squires
£90+: 3 squires

You want more squires? Use your entourage slots.

(I consider the Lawyer & the Major Domo to be administrative and the Huntsman to be an ordinary servant, not an entourage member.)


This is probably the root of my concern. I completely agree with your conclusions, but in BotEnt they are listed as followers. My preference would be to say these "come with the estate" but outside of a giant spreadsheet, I can't really think of a good way to show track this.

What the "hybrid system" is starting to look like to me is a table with the Estate size as the header and the Entourage members in the first column. Something along these lines:



Entourage
£10
£20
£30
£40
£50
£60
£70
£80
£90
£100


Squires
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
3


Handmaidens
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2


Nurse
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1


Entertainer (Lord's Choice)
0
0
0
1
2
2
2
2
2
2


Lord's Professional (Lord's Choice)
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
3
3


Lady's Professional (Lady's Choice)
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1



I haven't double checked the math or anything, this is more meant to show the concept. Essentially, you have types of Entourage slots and unlock them as you go along. The "Professional" slots let the PKs customize a bit (maybe a Lawyer and a Valet, or maybe they want something else). They are divided into "his" and "hers" to prevent the PKs from using all the slots themselves. :) You could also list some of the other gameplay specific items like the Knight Officers, the Spearmen, etc. Basically, it would list everything with gameplay impact and the rest "comes with the estate." The PKs don't care how many grooms they have. They just want to know how their money impacts them.

Right direction?

(I consider the Lawyer & the Major Domo to be administrative and the Huntsman to be an ordinary servant, not an entourage member.)

This is probably the root of my concern. I completely agree with your conclusions, but in BotEnt they are listed as followers. My preference would be to say these "come with the estate" but outside of a giant spreadsheet, I can't really think of a good way to show track this.


It doesn't matter. BotEnt is for EXTRA people you hire. At least, that is how I see it. People who don't have any other purpose but to follow along and do what you tell them to do. So, if a PK hires an Entourage Huntsman, that huntsman is following along to quests should the PK so require, helping to track bandits and what not (although he might very well refuse to track a dragon or something truly dangerous, at least unless he gets a hefty increase in pay!). The Estate Huntsman, by contrast, is tied to the Estate. Sure, he could go adventuring with the lord, but in his absence, the poachers are doing what they will, wolves roam the forest, etc etc.

I also included the squire & the handmaiden costs already to the SoL costs, since that is where they traditionally were. At least implied to be, although I am happy to say that an Ordinary SoL is lacking the handmaiden. Anyway, in my estate calculations, the Lord's & the Lady's households already include those people, up to a point, anyway. Similarly, the Lawyer was already accounted for in the administrative personel, while I was calculating the money left over for the entourage members.

The difference is rather miniscule, only £3 / year. If a PK in my campaign has managed to assemble an estate of £100, I am happy to let him have a bit more control over who he is hiring. For instance, I would not take it amiss if he chooses to hire an extra household knight. Why not?

I am entirely behind Morien in this
The households in Estate were not intended to be accounting records, but general guidelines







(I consider the Lawyer & the Major Domo to be administrative and the Huntsman to be an ordinary servant, not an entourage member.)

This is probably the root of my concern. I completely agree with your conclusions, but in BotEnt they are listed as followers. My preference would be to say these "come with the estate" but outside of a giant spreadsheet, I can't really think of a good way to show track this.


It doesn't matter. BotEnt is for EXTRA people you hire. At least, that is how I see it. People who don't have any other purpose but to follow along and do what you tell them to do. So, if a PK hires an Entourage Huntsman, that huntsman is following along to quests should the PK so require, helping to track bandits and what not (although he might very well refuse to track a dragon or something truly dangerous, at least unless he gets a hefty increase in pay!). The Estate Huntsman, by contrast, is tied to the Estate. Sure, he could go adventuring with the lord, but in his absence, the poachers are doing what they will, wolves roam the forest, etc etc.

I also included the squire & the handmaiden costs already to the SoL costs, since that is where they traditionally were. At least implied to be, although I am happy to say that an Ordinary SoL is lacking the handmaiden. Anyway, in my estate calculations, the Lord's & the Lady's households already include those people, up to a point, anyway. Similarly, the Lawyer was already accounted for in the administrative personel, while I was calculating the money left over for the entourage members.

The difference is rather miniscule, only £3 / year. If a PK in my campaign has managed to assemble an estate of £100, I am happy to let him have a bit more control over who he is hiring. For instance, I would not take it amiss if he chooses to hire an extra household knight. Why not?

I am entirely behind Morien in this
The households in Estate were not intended to be accounting records, but general guidelines


Eh, given that this is an exercise to use those households almost as accounting records, to see what else the PKs might get around to, I am hoping you are not behind me execution style, Greg. :P

I think we have a very nicely workable rule of thumb from earlier: 1 entourage member / £10. Sure, you could add a note that 50% of these ought to be entertainers & help for the Lady, lest she starts nagging and the court acquires a reputation of boorishness. Although I would definitely leave that to the GMs to decide. For instance, I wouldn't mind at all if my PKs were to try and get more soldiers during Anarchy rather than entertainers & hairdressers. Whereas doing a similar thing during Pax Arthuriana would elicit comment.

Although I would definitely leave that to the GMs to decide. For instance, I wouldn't mind at all if my PKs were to try and get more soldiers during Anarchy rather than entertainers & hairdressers. Whereas doing a similar thing during Pax Arthuriana would elicit comment.

OK, between Greg's comment and your note here, I'm convinced.

So to summarize (I confuse easily ::)):

All estates are completely self sufficient and generate exactly enough income to cover their expenses. The estates themselves have no gameplay impact with the following exceptions:


Estates provide 1 Knight, 2 footmen, 1 garrison per 10 libra.
PKs may add 1 Entourage member of their choice for every 10 libra to share between the Lord and his Lady. PKs should work with the GM to determine the makeup of this entourage. The selected members should include a mix of professionals, entertainers, and most importantly, should not shortchange the wife. See the sample estates for a reference. GM's can refer to page 20 of BotE for optional rules about shortchanging the wife.
The first entourage members that most Lords would add are the Nurse, Chaplain (no gameplay impact on either of these, do they take "a slot" or do we just say they "come with the estate"?) and the Steward (is this a true statement or does he also "come with the estate"?). -QUESTION: Do we even need this statement at all? The purpose here is to help PKs understand when they get the Steward roll since there is Gameplay impact from this. That's why I like him using an Entourage slot. Also, are there any other individuals that would "come with the estate" that would provide gameplay impact that we should move to "requiring an entourage slot."
Income from investments is added "on top" of the value of the Estate. -QUESTION: Do PKs get 100% of the income from investments, or 0.02 percent added to their discretionary income? I have been reading it as they get 100% of investment income.


Assuming all of this is true, we simply update the sample estates so they match the above rules (they are close), then add a little bit of explanatory text and we're done. Quick patch, very easy to implement IMHO.

I am entirely behind Morien in this
The households in Estate were not intended to be accounting records, but general guidelines

Eh, given that this is an exercise to use those households almost as accounting records, to see what else the PKs might get around to, I am hoping you are not behind me execution style, Greg. :P

:) Nah. If I were to do that it would be face to face, man to man.
If you work was bunk, I would feel differently.


I think we have a very nicely workable rule of thumb from earlier: 1 entourage member / £10. Sure, you could add a note that 50% of these ought to be entertainers & help for the Lady, lest she starts nagging and the court acquires a reputation of boorishness. Although I would definitely leave that to the GMs to decide. For instance, I wouldn't mind at all if my PKs were to try and get more soldiers during Anarchy rather than entertainers & hairdressers. Whereas doing a similar thing during Pax Arthuriana would elicit comment.

Agreed