We all know (?) that SIZ is too important in KAP. It is the single most important Stat: Knockdown, Damage, HP. Ignore it at your peril.

The problem here is, that if you let your players to roll stats, a low SIZ means low character survivability, which is just boring. And if you use the point buy system, you will invariably see a bunch of SIZ 18 hulks. No player who knows the system and think character survival is important would start a character with a SIZ below 16.

To combat this, I made my own system (discussed in a previous thread: http://nocturnal-media.com/forum/index.php?topic=2020.0), which was a random system, but with rules to guarantee that the characters rolled had a decent survivability. I'm pretty happy with my system, it achieved what I wanted from it, apart from one thing. Players still pushed up their character's SIZ to max. (And APP and to some extent DEX are still "dump stats").

Now I've reached the conclusion that the only way to aviod these outbreaks of giantism, is to make SIZ less important. I want to do this without having to redo the whole system. So I'm looking for a good tweak. My aim is to have a player to look at his SIZ, see that is 13, and say "I'm okay with that. There are other Stats I prefer to increase".

I have some suggestions below. I'd love to here your thoughts on them.

Note: Some of the suggestions below might look "unrealistic" for gamers who is into that. I do not wish to be drawn into a discussion about the realism of these suggestions. I want to solve a problem, the worst problem in KAP aside the skill system, and I am prepared to pay the cost in less "realism". Whatever that is; we are taking about some rather abstract concepts here; HP, for example, is just en extremely poor way to simulate how living beings take damage.

1) Change the HP formula.

1a) HP = CONx2.

1b) HP = CON+STR.

2) Change Knockdown. Knockdown is a derived stat.

2a) Knockdown = (DEX+STR)/2.

2b) Knockdown = (SIZ+DEX)/2.

3c) Knockdown = (SIZ+STR)/2.

3) Change Damage.

3a) Damage = STR/3.

Any thoughts? Any other ideas?

This post don't show from the first page, so I write this to *bump* it.

We all know (?) that SIZ is too important in KAP. It is the single most important Stat: Knockdown, Damage, HP. Ignore it at your peril.

The problem here is, that if you let your players to roll stats, a low SIZ means low character survivability, which is just boring. And if you use the point buy system, you will invariably see a bunch of SIZ 18 hulks. No player who knows the system and think character survival is important would start a character with a SIZ below 16.


We have noticed the same thing, although I'd say that a big part of the reason is the damage: 6d6 is where it is at, while 5d6 is barely adequate, and 4d6 will mean you are a loser in a battle. SIZ 18 + STR 15 is very popular, as is SIZ 17 + STR 16.

I would not change the formulas, since then I would have to recalculate everything for the already created characters. I'd much rather switch the 'cost' of statistics, such like:
SIZ: 4 points per stat point.
STR: 3 points per stat point.
CON & DEX: 2 points per stat point.
APP: 1 point per stat point.

Start all statistics at 10. Then divide 30 points to the statistics. (I am currently ignoring Culture bonuses, since they would clearly be way way more favorable to Saxons than to Cymri, for example.)

Average: SIZ 12, DEX 11, STR 14, CON 14, APP 10 = 30 points. Miscellaneous picks: +2 SIZ + 10 skill points.
=> SIZ 14, DEX 11, STR 14, CON 14, APP 10, +10 skill points. (Statistic points: 61+2 & +10 skills.)

Big Bruiser: SIZ 13, DEX 8, STR 16, CON 13, APP 8 = 12-4+18+4 = 30. Miscellaneous picks: +4 SIZ.
=> SIZ 17, DEX 8, STR 16, CON 13, APP 8. (Statistic points: 58+4.)

That would change the incentive math a bit. The Big Bruiser would still be a good fighter, but the more average build would actually be better with balance (significantly so) and have 10 extra skill points (likely enough to have a good head start in the courtly skills), as well as a bit better looking, too. Still not a huge shift, but might help?

Yeah, I agree about your assesment on the importance of damage. It seems most players think 4d6 is to measly, and no one minds 6d6. But high Knockdown and HP makes more for character survival than 6d6 damage.

I think your system is brilliant; indeed, if I ever go back to point buy I would use it. It's far better then the one in the rules! :D

But: I do not think that I quite share the way you wiegh the stats. I suggest:

SIZ: 4 points per stat point.
CON & STR: 2 points per stat point.
APP & DEX: 1 point per stat point.

OR

SIZ: 4 points per stat point.
CON & STR: 3 points per stat point.
DEX: 2 points per stat point.
APP: 1 point per stat point.

However, I'm afraid that this system won't stop the gigantism plauge. I would think the min-maxer would start at SIZ 13 or 14, increase it 2 or 3 steps with their "picks" (and so start with Sword @15 and possibly Lance @15 too). Then, the first Glory-step would increase it one more step, and if Sword isn't @20 when they get their second Glory-step, that too would go into SIZ. Then a couple of Glory-steps on Sword, and if SIZ isn't 18, they'd get that before reaching Famous Glory. :P

So I still wan't to nerf SIZ. The question is if I will use one or more of the suggestions above, or do something more radical with Knockdown.*

:-\

* I'm toying with the idea of making the Knockdown threashold equal to DEX+(1/2*SIZ) and allow no roll to avoid it; it's all or nothing. Or something on those lines.

Yeah, I agree about your assesment on the importance of damage. It seems most players think 4d6 is to measly, and no one minds 6d6. But high Knockdown and HP makes more for character survival than 6d6 damage.


They are obviously linked, since you can't get high damage without high SIZ but... in general, I'd say that SIZ 18 + STR 12 is inferior to SIZ 15 + STR 18. The 6d6 is tremendous advantage. You are basically guaranteed to trigger knockdown rolls even on bigger guys as well as maybe automatically knock smaller guys over. Also, even if the opponent gets a shield in between, you are still causing significant damage on an average roll, unlike 5d6 (assuming Armor 10+6). Anyway. :)



But: I do not think that I quite share the way you wiegh the stats. I suggest:


I think encouraging players to buy CON instead of STR is a worthwhile goal. Charging DEX at 1 point might make DEX a bit too cheap...But it might be a worthwhile goal. We might actually see some SIZ 12 characters with DEX 18.



However, I'm afraid that this system won't stop the gigantism plauge. I would think the min-maxer would start at SIZ 13 or 14, increase it 2 or 3 steps with their "picks" (and so start with Sword @15 and possibly Lance @15 too). Then, the first Glory-step would increase it one more step, and if Sword isn't @20 when they get their second Glory-step, that too would go into SIZ. Then a couple of Glory-steps on Sword, and if SIZ isn't 18, they'd get that before reaching Famous Glory. :P


Easy solution. Instead of allowing +1 to ANY stat with Miscellaneous Picks, give +2 stat-buy points. Or even +3. That would force you to spend 2 Miscellaneous picks for a mere +1 SIZ. And if they start pushing their Glory Points to SIZ, so be it. If you look at the Round Table Knight (or Extraordinary Knight) write-ups, they are mainly hulking brutes with 6d6. Same is true for many mythological heroes.



I'm toying with the idea of making the Knockdown threashold equal to DEX+(1/2*SIZ) and allow no roll to avoid it; it's all or nothing. Or something on those lines.


I think I have seen a similar suggestion being offered... The only criticism I have for that is that 6d6 becomes even more powerful, because you, presumably, need a couple more points of a thwack to trigger Knockdown, but it is then unavoidable. And 4d6 becomes even punier, because they need to roll even better to trigger the Knockdown.

Example:
Typical SIZ 14, DEX 10 average knight. Previously, the knockdown threshold was 14. Now it is 17.
4d6 will knock the knight down about 24% of the time (previously 50% of 56% = 27%, so not too bad).
5d6 will knock the knight down about 60% of the time (previously 42%, so a significant change).
6d6 will knock the knight down about 86% of the time (previously 48%, so almost doubling the chance).

Note that previously, 5d6 and 6d6 cause a knockdown almost as often, since the DEX roll is the dominant mechanism. Now, 6d6 is significantly better. So you would see even more pushing for 6d6, i.e. more giants.
6d6 will now knock them down pretty much 100%,

I think encouraging players to buy CON instead of STR is a worthwhile goal. Charging DEX at 1 point might make DEX a bit too cheap...But it might be a worthwhile goal. We might actually see some SIZ 12 characters with DEX 18.

That would be the day! But that is what I'm thinking with making DEX dirty cheep. But it may be good to make it as cheap as APP. I dunno. Might have to playtest this and see how it turns out.


Easy solution. Instead of allowing +1 to ANY stat with Miscellaneous Picks, give +2 stat-buy points. Or even +3. That would force you to spend 2 Miscellaneous picks for a mere +1 SIZ. And if they start pushing their Glory Points to SIZ, so be it. If you look at the Round Table Knight (or Extraordinary Knight) write-ups, they are mainly hulking brutes with 6d6. Same is true for many mythological heroes.

Yes, that is a good solution. I would not use it after a PK enters play; i.e. it would still only cost one Glory-step to incease SIZ, or any loss of SIZ would be really hard (and all old men would be really, really small!).


I think I have seen a similar suggestion being offered... The only criticism I have for that is that 6d6 becomes even more powerful, because you, presumably, need a couple more points of a thwack to trigger Knockdown, but it is then unavoidable. And 4d6 becomes even punier, because they need to roll even better to trigger the Knockdown.

Example:
Typical SIZ 14, DEX 10 average knight. Previously, the knockdown threshold was 14. Now it is 17.
4d6 will knock the knight down about 24% of the time (previously 50% of 56% = 27%, so not too bad).
5d6 will knock the knight down about 60% of the time (previously 42%, so a significant change).
6d6 will knock the knight down about 86% of the time (previously 48%, so almost doubling the chance).

Note that previously, 5d6 and 6d6 cause a knockdown almost as often, since the DEX roll is the dominant mechanism. Now, 6d6 is significantly better. So you would see even more pushing for 6d6, i.e. more giants.

6d6 will now knock them down pretty much 100%.


I was to lazy to do the maths. Should have. Thanks. I'll just put that idea out of my mind.

I have some other ideas regarding Knockdown, to make SIZ at least a bit less important - and to make DEX moore so - but I think that will have to wait for another thread.

Thanks for the feedback. Sad that it's only you and me that are interested in these issues, this part of the forum seems to be just for the two of us. O well.

Hey, I'm interested! But why get in the way of brilliance? You guys are doing great on your own!


T.

This may be an unpopular question, but Why bother Nerfing Siz?

As is, Most knights will be big. So?

What's wrong with that?

So, most of your hereditary warrior nobility end up being a lot bigger than most of the commoners. And?

Big blokes are more effective in melee combat. Well, Yes.

there have still been PKs in the game I'm in who've chosen to prioritise APP and DEX over SIZ and CON.

I don't think Stats are where you characters define themselves. That's what traits and passions do a better job there, and ultimately, the players style and the character's personality.

there have still been PKs in the game I'm in who've chosen to prioritise APP and DEX over SIZ and CON.


The issue, Dan, is that SIZ is the obvious thing to get. In any game that has combat, it is MUCH more useful than the equivalent amount of DEX. And unfortunately, DEX doesn't matter outside combat, save for very uncommon DEX tests such as climbing or balance, either of which is much less likely to come up than a bit of bashing other people. Fighting, after all, is what the knights are for.

Example:
Knight A: SIZ 18, DEX 8, STR 15: Knockdown 18, damage 6d6
Knight B: SIZ 8, DEX 18, STR 15: Knockdown 8, damage 4d6
Now, when A hits, he is causing significant damage on average, even if B gets his shield. Not only that, but whopping 90% of the time, the damage rolled is 16 or more, meaning an autoknockdown on B, who doesn't even get to roll his DEX. By comparison, B would be struggling to get past A's armor (+shield). And to even trigger a knockdown test, he needs to roll 18+, which happens mere 16% of the time. And A still gets the DEX roll, which is successful 40% of the time, rendering the final chance of a knockdown to a mere 10% vs. A's guaranteed 90%. In addition, A gets 10 more hitpoints. So not only will he make more damage vs. B, but he is able to take more, too. There is absolutely no doubt that A will absolutely demolish B in a fight, all other things being equal, absent some fortuitous critical rolls.

So what does B get in return for his high DEX? Not much, really. Even a basic 5d6 knight would knock B on his ass over half the time with 16+ damage, where as A would still get getting his DEX rolls or not roll at all in more than half of the time. So as you can see, even in the case of DEX's main duty in combat, keeping your balance, having SIZ is better. And outside of that balance roll, DEX rolls are uncommon.

What Skarpskytten and I have been discussing is not so much preventing the knights from being big blokes, but making the builds more balanced. Instead of A and B having equal amount of points in SIZ and DEX, the build might be more like this (assuming DEX at half the price compared to SIZ):
A: SIZ 18, DEX 8, STR 15
B: SIZ 13, DEX 18, STR 15
And now it is a totally different ballgame. First of all, it is 5d6 vs. 6d6. Also, getting an autoknockdown on B is much, much harder. And without autoknockdown, B will be staying up 90% of the time. By contrast, B is able to cause knockdown rolls on A, which A, 60% of the time, will fail. So now, both of the builds are actually valid: A has more hit points and hits harder, but B is more able to stay on his feet, most of the time, so might win the game by knocking A down and then managing a couple of good hits in while A is struggling up again.

@Taliesin: Thanks!

@Dan. I have little to add to Moriens answer.

The problem here is a bit larger than I suggest in the start, it is the balance between different stats and in turn, the balance between different "builds". If you use RAW and build a character with high DEX, your chances of survival deceases with little gain. If you build a high APP character, well, blame yourself.

I have run like 260+ sessions of this game and seen I would guess 100 PKs. Most of them had more or less the same stats. The good ones, the one that makes your character hard to kill, hard to knockover and a hard hitter.

And that is boring. I would like to see more varied builds. I would like to give players how do not want to play "tanks" somehting in thanks, not just a character that is more likely to die. And to accomplish that you must either change the rules, making SIZ less powerful and give DEX and APP more of a punch in-game or make a system on the lines of that which we discuss above, one which ranks the Statistics according to their power.

And I don't mind big PKs. What I mind is, in a world were an average knight is SIZ 14, most PKs are SIZ 18-21. I'm sick of the sight of 'em, those giants. I would for once in my life like to see a PK that is actually as tall as 75% of the other knights in the world.

And I think it was a relevant question. I understand that not all my share mine and Moriens concerns here. I have played with groups contianing few or no min-maxers, and when you do, these problems do not crop up. But a game like this, with high character lethality must be able to handle min-maxing. You can't have a gave which is hard on PCs and forbid players to make strong builds. So what me and Morien is trying to do here, is to make life much harder for the min-maxers and encouragement to all those players who comes up with "poor-but-cool" builds.

I agree that this is a problem and i would like a good solution. But i dont think that a point buy system will solve it as it doesn't change the lethality of the game. Even being hulking brutes my players are dying left and right. I don't think anybody would start changing there builds until they thought their knights would have any chance surviving more than a couple of years.

But i dont think that a point buy system will solve it as it doesn't change the lethality of the game.


I think my experiences of the lethality of the game might differ from yours, Debel... I started a new thread here to talk about it:
http://nocturnal-media.com/forum/index.php?topic=2653.msg19735#msg19735

I would be very interested in hearing of your experiences when it comes to the lethality of Pendragon. :)

I agree that this is a problem and i would like a good solution. But i dont think that a point buy system will solve it as it doesn't change the lethality of the game. Even being hulking brutes my players are dying left and right. I don't think anybody would start changing there builds until they thought their knights would have any chance surviving more than a couple of years.

Well, it's a valid point, but you know, lethality isn't a given quantity, it's something a GM has a lot of power over.

Now, if all your PKs (more or less) are 35+ HP, 6d6, Sword-skill 23+, you must, if you do not want them to feel safe amd just breeze through the adventures, really hit them hard. You need to use opponents with high damage and high skills, occasionally at the same time, inceasing the likelyhood of "killer-crits". In such an environment, a less than optimal built character will have a really, really hard time, as will young knights. Thus you get a dynamic that pushes all players towards min-maxing.

If your players build more balanced characters, you can go more easy in them. Even a bunch of 5d6, Combat-skill 15 opponents will challenge such a group, and the likelyhood of those killer crits are less. This is were I want to be, but playing with min-maxers makes that impossible. (With "impossible" I mean, that I do not want to run a game were the PKs live charmed existences and were players do not fear combat).

I have tried to cut down on the number of combat encounters to encourage more varied PKs, but it doesn't work, becasue 1) most Glory comes form combat anyway and 2) when push do come to shove, many players still want an character that's as safe as they can be.

But, then again, you might be right. I may be adressing the wrong problem.

But SIZ still is too good. And DEX and APP to poor. And I think it is a valid project to try to make them more equal. (For APP there are a couple of good threads on the famous "APP-roll" in this sub-section of the forum).

The big problem I think is everyone is thinking just combat. True, earlier in the campaign, battling Saxons, a great idea is to have hulking brutes. But, as time moves on in the campaign, and combat on a daily/yearly basis starts to take a back seat to romance and quests that require other skills than just SIZ, then those characters will start to lose on the glory track. True, when it comes to battle, they have the advantage, but how much of a quest during the high period is the combat?

I like some of the ideas I've seen in this thread, but SIZ can also work against you. In the early times, Saxons were the big brutes. In a battle that turns into a general melee, suppose your SIZ 18 character mixes it up with a few Saxons. You defeat those around you. Suddenly, a strange Cymri knight who has a Hate SAXON of 18+ shows up next to you. Does he greet you warmly and congratulatory about defeating those hated foes, or does he succeed in his hate and treat you as just another SAXON because of your size?

Just musing...

If your players think combat is the all, then be more creative and put them in situations where combat and SIZE is less important. A young heiress who loves dancing, but also dislikes tall or fat men would likely favor someone else over you, etc.

If your players think combat is the all, then be more creative and put them in situations where combat and SIZE is less important. A young heiress who loves dancing, but also dislikes tall or fat men would likely favor someone else over you, etc.


But I am more creative. In my epic PGC-campaing I ran roughly one combat per session (that is, more than one once in a while, none at all once in a while, and one combat most sessions) and it didn't matter (for the reasons given in the post above).

I do think that part of the problem is all the early battles against Saxons. It kind of shocked some of my players, and beeing hell bent on not getting their characters killed by Saxons they just continued to make the same builds, over and over again.

But, sure, I may try to have even fewer combats in the future. But there is a limit. And I doubt that it will solve the SIZ-problem. I do think that Moriens suggestion is the correct solution (or the solution is to just not care or run another game :().

If your players think combat is the all, then be more creative and put them in situations where combat and SIZE is less important. A young heiress who loves dancing, but also dislikes tall or fat men would likely favor someone else over you, etc.


But, sure, I may try to have even fewer combats in the future. But there is a limit. And I doubt that it will solve the SIZ-problem. I do think that Moriens suggestion is the correct solution (or the solution is to just not care or run another game :().


I agree that if you start out with Uther, then having big brutes is trying to even things out. I will admit to not reading every little detail of Morien's suggestion, but Uther's and Arthur's solution was not to start a breeding program to enlarge SIZ.

That being said, players are players and you do have a valid point. In 4th edition, there was a "feint" maneuver that could counter being hit, that my Picts used quite successfully against the giants of the players. Not to compare Pendragon with too many other systems, but I expect this is one area that does need to be addressed.
.Moving onto other systems? Been there, many times, but Pendragon keeps me coming back. Every campaign has been different, even with the same items being done.

Double Feint halved enemy armor on a successful DEX roll. It didn't help against being hit.

Dodge is still there as far as I recall, but it is a sucker's choice unless you are unarmed or trying to run away. Better to use Defensive option and roll at Weapon skill +10 than to pit your DEX (up to -10 from armor) against enemy's weapon skill.

I always liked the 'double feint' move. I was sad to see it go. I think the problem was that there were some ways in which it was abused. I don't remember exactly what the problem was.

I'd like to see it come back in some form, but also include some ability to dodge and fight as well as to reduce your opponent's AP.

NT

Dodge is potentially good for high DEX characters, since you roll your full DEX against each opponent (no splitting). And actually, there is no automatic -10 for wearing armor: "Armor and footing may grant modifiers". My italics. So one way of giving DEX more bite is just to say that armor never grant a modifier to Dodge. But the difference is not large. A PK with DEX 15 and Sword 20 facing two opponents is still better of using Defense, since it also gives shield.

As for Double Feint, I know that Greg has said that it was removed due to beeing to easy to abuse, but to my knowlede he has not said in what way. I allowed it in my second to last, epic 93 session campaing. One player ever used et, building a DEX 25 character. I didn't seem overpowered, as I recall, nor worth all it took to make that build. I think its just to weak to be worthwile, since, as written in 4 ed, it requires an extremely high DEX to be effective. It's just better to dump all that training and Glory-steps into SIZ and Sword instead.

So, back to square one: SIZ is to good.

I see two solutions. The first is the one suggested by Morien, grading the cost of the stats at character creation. This has been discussed. The second is adopting one or several of the suggestions I made at the start of this thread (or some variant of those). This has still not been discussed. :-\

Right you are, I was thinking of Evasion, which is divided and which should get encumbrance modifiers, IMHO. Dodge should too, but then again, the -10 for metal armor is too high penalty to start with.

The problem with Double Feint, if I recall Greg correctly, was that people tried it TOO much with poor DEX (with -10 for Armor). Even with DEX 20, you are likely to fail 50% of the time, thus wasting half of your hits. Someone with DEX 15, which is already very respectable to a knight, you are wasting 75% of your hits, only landing one hit in four, when you'd be better off knocking the guy down and then getting the +5/-5 modifier to critical or get past the shield. So he took Double Feint out in 5th edition. I am pretty sure that there is some old thread here somewhere where he explains his decision.

I would not change the formulas, since then I would have to recalculate everything for the already created characters.


That was my response to the formula-change suggestions. That being said, this one would have promise, especially if you keep the DEX roll to stay upright, too:
2b) Knockdown = (SIZ+DEX)/2.
Recalculating knockdown isn't all that hard. The only downside is that you might get odd results with small critters (but you wouldn't fight rats all that often) and giants (who are likely big enough to not be subject to knockdown even with the abysmal DEX).

Right you are, I was thinking of Evasion, which is divided and which should get encumbrance modifiers, IMHO. Dodge should too, but then again, the -10 for metal armor is too high penalty to start with.

The problem with Double Feint, if I recall Greg correctly, was that people tried it TOO much with poor DEX (with -10 for Armor). Even with DEX 20, you are likely to fail 50% of the time, thus wasting half of your hits. Someone with DEX 15, which is already very respectable to a knight, you are wasting 75% of your hits, only landing one hit in four, when you'd be better off knocking the guy down and then getting the +5/-5 modifier to critical or get past the shield. So he took Double Feint out in 5th edition. I am pretty sure that there is some old thread here somewhere where he explains his decision.


I'd really like to see some more combat tactics in this game, but of the three old ones (bersker/"all out"-attack / double feint / defence) only defence really works. The other two are unbalanced, and encourages min-maxing among players. And that is of course the problem; making such tactics balanced is really tricky. But that was a bit OT, methinks.

Moving onto other systems? Been there, many times, but Pendragon keeps me coming back. Every campaign has been different, even with the same items being done.


Well so do I. I even spend to much time on this forum, even if I do not run a game right now. I want to be prepared when the time comes.

What I meant with "another system" was running KAP with another engine. I.e. i might use all the material and the PGC, but use another system. I think that KAP has a brilliant dice mechanism and is really good for a BRP-clone. I think that the Trait, Passion and Ideal systems works really well, as does the Glory system. But the Attributes and Skill systems have severe problems, and I'm mulling over right now if I'll just try to live with it with my next go with this game, or if I will give it a new engine.

I'd really like to see some more combat tactics in this game, but of the three old ones (bersker/"all out"-attack / double feint / defence) only defence really works. The other two are unbalanced, and encourages min-maxing among players. And that is of course the problem; making such tactics balanced is really tricky. But that was a bit OT, methinks.


If you make the Berserker bonus +5 instead of +5, and still allow it to cancel the Defence, it works pretty OK. At least so far in our games, people have used Berserk mode only when they get a 'free strike' or when they are pretty sure that the opponent is going defensive (such as when they are trying to get up). The +5 is small enough a bonus that it is useful, but probably not worth the risk unless you are really desperate or confident that the enemy is not hitting hard enough to hurt you.

But the Attributes and Skill systems have severe problems, and I'm mulling over right now if I'll just try to live with it with my next go with this game, or if I will give it a new engine.


Hmm. I am not sure I would call them 'severe'. I have already offered a couple of suggestions on this thread on how to 'fix' the 'giant knight' problem. As for skills, maybe you should start another thread on those? Or resurrect an old one? :) I can point to 'useless' skills and the fact that the skills start so low, but the former can be fixed with combining several weak skills, which helps in the latter as well, and you can add a houserule that skills below 10 cost only 0.5 points to raise each. We are using that in a current campaign and it works rather well. Finally, one thing to keep in mind is that failure in a skill usually doesn't mean a catastrophe; that is reserved for fumbles.

I'll keep your berserker option in mind, Morien. I've also having the idea that Knockdown could be a tactic, instead of something that happens automatically. May post my thoughts one day.

Well "severe" might be a bit severe. But I think you know what I mean. I think your fix is good, but I'd still prefer that the Attributes were born equal so to say. I'm guessing that this problem won't be adressed in KAP6, so we will have to find our own solutions.

As for the skills, I have begun writing a revised skill list and it may appear here if I ever find the time to finish it. I'm merging, removing and also creating new skills, so much I can say. (I want to keep the total number of skills in the game constant).

I am also toying with the idea of having a number of courtly skill give annual Glory, up to a max of 100 per year. The reason for this is that I want to get away from what we can call the "Chess-Glory-syndrome" which tends to haunt my games. This is basically this. GM thinks, preparing a session: "Poor Stefan has wasted a lof of points on Gaming/Dancing/some other less useful skill. I should give him a opportunity to get some Glory for it". This leads to a kind of filler scenes, in which nothing dramatically interesting are happening just to allow the exercis of the less good skills. I want to get away from that, and this might do the trick. On the other hand, Glory inflation rears its ugly head, and I hate Glory inflation. It unbalances the whole game.

I'll keep your berserker option in mind, Morien. I've also having the idea that Knockdown could be a tactic, instead of something that happens automatically. May post my thoughts one day.


You mean like a shield bash? I'd probably keep the knockdown as normal, since it feels appropriate to me that a giant would still be swatting knights flying.

Shield Bash might work like this: Roll your normal damage+2d6 for knockdown damage. Half of this is real damage.

This would help those 4d6 foot soldiers to topple those SIZ 18 DEX 8 giant knights.



Well "severe" might be a bit severe. But I think you know what I mean. I think your fix is good, but I'd still prefer that the Attributes were born equal so to say. I'm guessing that this problem won't be adressed in KAP6, so we will have to find our own solutions.


Hmm. Knockdown = (SIZ+DEX)/2 would probably be the easiest to implement and probably not TOO unbalanced. Little critters with high DEX are probably very quick to get up, so you can easily say that 'yes, you knocked that cat down, but it got up again really really fast'.



As for the skills, I have begun writing a revised skill list and it may appear here if I ever find the time to finish it. I'm merging, removing and also creating new skills, so much I can say. (I want to keep the total number of skills in the game constant).


New thread. :)



I am also toying with the idea of having a number of courtly skill give annual Glory, up to a max of 100 per year. The reason for this is that I want to get away from what we can call the "Chess-Glory-syndrome" which tends to haunt my games. This is basically this. GM thinks, preparing a session: "Poor Stefan has wasted a lof of points on Gaming/Dancing/some other less useful skill. I should give him a opportunity to get some Glory for it". This leads to a kind of filler scenes, in which nothing dramatically interesting are happening just to allow the exercis of the less good skills. I want to get away from that, and this might do the trick. On the other hand, Glory inflation rears its ugly head, and I hate Glory inflation. It unbalances the whole game.


This is another one of those new thread things, but... One easy way to give the courtly knight more bang for the buck would be to:
1) Allow rolls of 5 courtly skills in Solo of the Winter Phase for 10 Glory each and an experience check. Those courtly knights might be getting some extra Glory out of this, but not as much as to cause Glory Inflation.
2) Recognize that Uther & Anarchy Periods is not all that courtly. Sucks to be a courtly knight.
3) In Arthur's times, let the Courtly Knight pick up 'lady favors'. You need to hear some gossip but have low Intrigue? Try to dance with a lady in the know, and she might use her Intrigue of 15 on your behalf, if you impress her. And so forth. This is a bit of a cheat, admittedly.

Frankly, I think if I were to design the skill system from the beginning, I would put skills in different categories and value them differently: 1 point, 0.5 point and 0.25 points, for example. That would allow those Courtly Knights to have Falconry, Dancing, Play and Singing while someone else picks up Hunting or Battle. Since those 'fluff' skills are so rarely used, might as well give a hefty discount on those.

And if I remember correctly, Family Traits break it down to +5/+10 to a skill depending on how important it is. So, there is precedence.

You mean like a shield bash?

I mean, it's never automtic. It only happens if you try to achieve it.


Hmm. Knockdown = (SIZ+DEX)/2 would probably be the easiest to implement and probably not TOO unbalanced. Little critters with high DEX are probably very quick to get up, so you can easily say that 'yes, you knocked that cat down, but it got up again really really fast'.

Yes, it might work. Or just reverse thier role, so that DEX is the trigger and SIZ what you roll to "save"?


New thread. :)'

One day!




Frankly, I think if I were to design the skill system from the beginning, I would put skills in different categories and value them differently: 1 point, 0.5 point and 0.25 points, for example. That would allow those Courtly Knights to have Falconry, Dancing, Play and Singing while someone else picks up Hunting or Battle. Since those 'fluff' skills are so rarely used, might as well give a hefty discount on those.

Well, that is a fix on the lines of what you have suggested with the Attributes. It will certainly work, though it may not be very elegant.

If I were to design the skill system from the beginning, I would try to make all skills equally useful. But lets continue that discussion in another thread, some other day.

What if we let the “picks” during PK creation push skills above 15, with one pick adding one to a score?

This would add to PK variety because one could make tough-combat-build PKs from the very beginning without sky-high SIZ. Think the Viper vs. the Mountain in Game of Thrones, except without that Reckless critical at the end ....

What if we let the “picks” during PK creation push skills above 15, with one pick adding one to a score?

This would add to PK variety because one could make tough-combat-build PKs from the very beginning without sky-high SIZ. Think the Viper vs. the Mountain in Game of Thrones, except without that Reckless critical at the end ....


I have been thinking of that. It would certainly appeal to some players. So, you put your four picks into Sword, starting at 19. In the Winter Phase, you train Sword and then add the Glory point from being knighted to Sword. So when the PK starts his second year, at age 22, he has Sword 21. And is rather unbalanced.

It will also achive something else. In the canon, there are always young knights popping up that are just awsome fighters despite beeing noob. Not so in KAP, were the best fighters are in their 30s.

So, yes, perhaps. If combined with Moriens point-buy system, it would give some min-maxers a lot of angst, at least. :D

It will also achive something else. In the canon, there are always young knights popping up that are just awsome fighters despite beeing noob. Not so in KAP, were the best fighters are in their 30s.


That is because they are Princes of Famous Kings. Blood will tell. Lancelot, Gareth, Percivale...

My decision for such superheroes would be to start them with 70 attribute points and give them like double the chargen points (20 skill points, 8 choices). And yes, they are allowed to break the rule of 15 at character generation.

One way you could keep players from using dexterity as a dump stat is to set a hard cap for weapon skills at 2DEX. An average knight (12 across the board, 15 CON) wouldn't even notice a difference as most knights never come close to a sword or lance skill of 24, but a min-maxing player Knight (SIZ 17, STR 16, DEX 8, CON 14, APP 8,) despite a damage statistic of 6d6 and 31HP, has a max sword skill of 16 (not counting conditional modifiers obviously).

It's a meaningful sacrifice of finesse and agility for sheer brute force, and vice versa. This also goes some way towards mitigating the 'Tink Tink BOOM' aspect of high level duels.

You could make Appearance more valuable as well if you renamed it to 'Appeal' and made it an important component of social interaction or more importantly romantic interaction, modified by relative glory and the expense of one's outfit, rather than those things affecting the courtly skills directly.

For example,
Fumble: The other party has taken an irrational dislike of you at first sight, -5 to future social rolls with them.
Failure: No Affect.
Success: The other party finds you/your company appealing, +3 to social rolls.
Critical: The other party is enamored with you, +6 to social/courtly skills with them.

How often you make players roll APP is up entirely to how much bookkeeping you plan on doing just so long as you adhere to the following principle:

Sir Loderich the Mighty may be able to cleave a man in twain without looking, but it's Sir Laingrin the Fair who ends up with the three manor heiress and the weekly card games with Earl Roderick.

Of Course in the case of Sir Roderick and other heterosexual men, I would reduce the bonuses to +1 on a success (merely likes the cut of your jib), and +3 on a crit (enjoys your company, finds you appealing in a platonic way.) And of course there are some ladies who, for reasons left ambiguous by the romances of the day, will never be very receptive to a man's advances, while conversely the players may notice a few male NPC's who are more friendly/acquiescent to the more attractive members of the group.

As a variation on the Half-Cost for weapon skills under ten, you could have Half-Cost for weapon skills under (STR+DEX)/2, and has already been suggested, have HP = 2CON, as well as have healing rate be 1/10th of HP. In my opinion this makes all four physical stats equally important, or at least most builds equally viable.

SIZ = Knockdown and Damage.
STR = Damage and Weapon Skill cost.
CON = HP, Healing Rate, Injury Limits.
DEX = Knockdown, Weapon Skill cost, Weapon Skill Cap.

So, I've been considering this, too. I'm looking at the following formula:
Knockdown = [(SIZ+DEX)/4]+10
Damage = (STR+SIZ)/6
Healing Rate = (APP+CON)/10
Move Rate = (STR+DEX)/10
Major Wound = CON

This brings up APP and DEX some while mitigating the STR and SIZ importance. I feel like this would also encourage slightly more robust builds of Knights. Or have I gone too far?

Knockdown is looking better at [(SIZ+DEX)/3] and then either add 6 or 7. Depends on if we should aim for the higher side of the scale or the lower... 7 puts average KD at 17 while +6 puts it at 16.

KD4d65d66d6
1544%78%94%
1634%69%90%
1724%60%86%
1816%50%79%
1910%40%72%
205%30%63%

The table above lists the odds of a Knockdown for the different damage dice amounts... 17 is looking like the best average. Making /3 + 7 optimal, I think.

I have been experimenting using these
I'm not a whiz at math but I'm no dummy at it either
I find them to be far to much hassle to enjoy character generation at all
It's not the system that is complex
it's working the system

it is trying to refigure stats after juggling them around, one from here, two from there, lower that to raise this--oh no, gotta lower two of them
then keeping track of the Derived statistics while doing so

I feel like you could do this more easily by changing auto-knockdown from Size+Size to Size+Dex. That basically comes out to one extra derived statistic to work out, but since there's no division, there's no real need to pick specific numbers.

This would put the high Dex knight in a better position to avoid knockdowns (which is already one of the benefits of Dex) - he would have to roll more often than the high Size knight, but he'd be in a better spot to succeed.

I feel like you could do this more easily by changing auto-knockdown from Size+Size to Size+Dex. That basically comes out to one extra derived statistic to work out, but since there's no division, there's no real need to pick specific numbers.


How about just making Knockdown (SIZ+DEX)/2? I think this has been suggested before, and it just requires to write it down under the (Knockdown) in the character sheet. It is easy to just double that to see when an automatic Knockdown happens.

This might already go a long way towards making DEX a bit more useful and SIZ a bit less of a super stat.

SIZ 10 and DEX 16 = Knockdown 12, 80% chance of resisting (DEX roll).
SIZ 14 and DEX 10 = Knockdown 12, 50% chance of resisting (DEX roll).
SIZ 16 and DEX 8 = Knockdown 12, 40% chance of resisting (DEX roll).

This actually helps to keep DEX relevant: All of the above have the same auto knockdown at 24, rather than SIZ 10 at 20 and SIZ 16 at 32, which is a HUGE advantage to SIZ 16 in the normal system.

I think the above actually would already move DEX a lot in the utility. SIZ is probably still the 'best stat', but given that you can't raise it after chargen except with Glory Points, this might already balance things out a bit.

Having HP = CON+CON rather than SIZ + CON would help a lot, too, but I am not sure I agree that SIZ has nothing to do with hit points. :P

Hmm. How about making HP = STR + CON? STR and SIZ tend to go hand in hand, so it is not a bad correlation for general durability, but would divorce SIZ from the HP. CON already has a role in resisting Major Wounds and such, but if we wish to boost it a bit more and weaken STR, drop STR from healing rate.

So the Derived Statistics would be:
Knockdown = (SIZ + DEX)/2
Major Wound = CON
Damage = (SIZ+STR)/6
Healing Rate = CON/5
Movement Rate = (STR+DEX)/10
Hit Points = STR + CON
Unconscious = HP/4

SIZ gives you stability (knockdown) and damage.
DEX gives you even more stability (knockdown, balance roll) and movement rate.
STR gives you damage and hit points and movement rate.
CON gives you major wound threshold, hit points and healing rate.

On a glance, those look more of less balanced. (And apologies if someone has already brought the above up. I didn't bother rereading the thread again.)


The other option is to keep the system itself as is and go to a point buy system for the stats, where we explicitly 'price' the stats according to their usability. The big advantage of this is that nothing changes as far as stats that things and NPCs and so forth have. Only thing that changes is how the chargen works, and after that it plays the same. Personally, I think I would go with this option. I would rather have a bit more work in chargen. It doesn't add that much of an overhead, we already use spreadsheets as char sheets and it is easy enough to make a 'charpoint calculator' to sum the stats up with different prices. GURPS can do it, why couldn't we?

How about just making Knockdown (SIZ+DEX)/2? I think this has been suggested before, and it just requires to write it down under the (Knockdown) in the character sheet. It is easy to just double that to see when an automatic Knockdown happens.

This might already go a long way towards making DEX a bit more useful and SIZ a bit less of a super stat.

SIZ 10 and DEX 16 = Knockdown 12, 80% chance of resisting (DEX roll).
SIZ 14 and DEX 10 = Knockdown 12, 50% chance of resisting (DEX roll).
SIZ 16 and DEX 8 = Knockdown 12, 40% chance of resisting (DEX roll).

This actually helps to keep DEX relevant: All of the above have the same auto knockdown at 24, rather than SIZ 10 at 20 and SIZ 16 at 32, which is a HUGE advantage to SIZ 16 in the normal system.

The main reason I don't like that is because it can be counter-intuitive. That is, Size 10, Dex 15 is KD 13 and auto-KD 26. But 26 doesn't equal 10+15! Also, I think that this makes it into a stat where you want to make sure that they add up odd, which is something I would prefer to avoid in character generation.


The other option is to keep the system itself as is and go to a point buy system for the stats, where we explicitly 'price' the stats according to their usability. The big advantage of this is that nothing changes as far as stats that things and NPCs and so forth have. Only thing that changes is how the chargen works, and after that it plays the same. Personally, I think I would go with this option. I would rather have a bit more work in chargen. It doesn't add that much of an overhead, we already use spreadsheets as char sheets and it is easy enough to make a 'charpoint calculator' to sum the stats up with different prices. GURPS can do it, why couldn't we?

I'm not a fan of this idea. First of all, I think it would be a lot of work, especially considering that you may have to make a lot of characters in Pendragon. I do not use, and do not want to use, a spreadsheet as a character sheet. Call me old-fashioned, but I like to write stuff down. Second, and I think more importantly, it messes with the training rules. It creates a difference between starting Str 14 and Dex 10 and training up to 14/14, and starting at Str 10, Dex 14 and doing the opposite. I don't think you should ever have to worry about the order in which you do something like that. Also, you would have to rebalance all of the cultures, which are currently set so that each gives you +3 attribute points. Cost attributes differently and that gets messed up. You say that nothing changes, but I think you would actually need to change much more to make this work.

The main reason I don't like that is because it can be counter-intuitive. That is, Size 10, Dex 15 is KD 13 and auto-KD 26. But 26 doesn't equal 10+15! Also, I think that this makes it into a stat where you want to make sure that they add up odd, which is something I would prefer to avoid in character generation.

I'm not a fan of this idea. First of all, I think it would be a lot of work, especially considering that you may have to make a lot of characters in Pendragon. I do not use, and do not want to use, a spreadsheet as a character sheet. Call me old-fashioned, but I like to write stuff down. Second, and I think more importantly, it messes with the training rules. It creates a difference between starting Str 14 and Dex 10 and training up to 14/14, and starting at Str 10, Dex 14 and doing the opposite. I don't think you should ever have to worry about the order in which you do something like that. Also, you would have to rebalance all of the cultures, which are currently set so that each gives you +3 attribute points. Cost attributes differently and that gets messed up. You say that nothing changes, but I think you would actually need to change much more to make this work.
I'm going to agree with the Thane of Fife here.
Just for the record

The main reason I don't like that is because it can be counter-intuitive. That is, Size 10, Dex 15 is KD 13 and auto-KD 26. But 26 doesn't equal 10+15! Also, I think that this makes it into a stat where you want to make sure that they add up odd, which is something I would prefer to avoid in character generation.

Auto-knockdown happens at 2*knockdown number. If Knockdown number is 13, calculated by any means, then it is 26. If you are really bothered by this, mark it down as 12.5 and let DEX roll be triggered at 13, and auto-knockdown at 25. Problem solved.

But frankly, the round-offs you should really be concerned about are Damage, Healing Rate and Move, all of which give you a LOT more oomph than a mere 1 more point in Knockdown. You can easily get into a situation where 1 or even 2 more points in STR doesn't give you ANY benefit, and since STR rolls tend to be much rarer than DEX rolls (knockdown), you don't even benefit from the higher stat. Healing Rate and Move are especially bad in this sense, since that one point can be +50% difference in your derived stat. Although for obvious reasons, many players maximize their Damage first. SIZ 18, STR 15 is probably the most common build I see with my players after chargen ,although 17 and 16 and even 16 and 17 sometimes rival it. And wouldn't you know that the DEX tends to be 10, 9 and 8...

[Point Buy system critique:]


First of all, I think it would be a lot of work, especially considering that you may have to make a lot of characters in Pendragon.

Second, and I think more importantly, it messes with the training rules.

Also, you would have to rebalance all of the cultures

1) That can be a valid point, I admit. It might indeed be easier for the GM to go through the opponent templates and change them.

2) Not irrevocably. SIZ doesn't matter since you can't train it up after chargen anyway. If STR is 50% more than than DEX & CON and APP is half of that of DEX (so 1/3rd of STR), you can easily have the training rules as 1 point of STR or 1.5 points of DEX & CON or 3 points of APP. Sure, you'd have to keep track of 0.5 points of DEX & CON, but that is hardly impossible, especially on pen and paper (and as usual, 0.5 rounds up so your DEX 12.5 works as DEX 13, but that 12.5 is there to remind you that the next DEX point gets you only to 14, not 14.5).

3) Again, this is easily done. In fact, I think many people would agree with me that Saxons are currently the munchkin's dream with SIZ and STR +3 and DEX -3, so rebalancing the cultural modifiers would actually be a good thing, IMHO.


Anyway, did you have any comments on the proposed new Derived Stats other than the Knockdown I proposed, seeing that we have to agree to disagree on the point buy system, Thane? :)

Auto-knockdown happens at 2*knockdown number. If Knockdown number is 13, calculated by any means, then it is 26. If you are really bothered by this, mark it down as 12.5 and let DEX roll be triggered at 13, and auto-knockdown at 25. Problem solved.

But frankly, the round-offs you should really be concerned about are Damage, Healing Rate and Move, all of which give you a LOT more oomph than a mere 1 more point in Knockdown. You can easily get into a situation where 1 or even 2 more points in STR doesn't give you ANY benefit, and since STR rolls tend to be much rarer than DEX rolls (knockdown), you don't even benefit from the higher stat. Healing Rate and Move are especially bad in this sense, since that one point can be +50% difference in your derived stat. Although for obvious reasons, many players maximize their Damage first. SIZ 18, STR 15 is probably the most common build I see with my players after chargen ,although 17 and 16 and even 16 and 17 sometimes rival it. And wouldn't you know that the DEX tends to be 10, 9 and 8...

In this case, it bothers me because you're taking a number, dividing it by 2, and then multiplying it by 2, and getting a different number than you started with.

The other rounding doesn't bother me because it's a much larger spread between important numbers. If you had stats you liked the look of, you probably wouldn't shift four points around to increase your damage by an extra die. By if you only had to shift one point to do it, I think you usually would. When your spread is only two points, it's going to be very common to look to shift a point.

I don't hate the averaged Size and Dex, but I don't like it as much as the alternative.


Anyway, did you have any comments on the proposed new Derived Stats other than the Knockdown I proposed, seeing that we have to agree to disagree on the point buy system, Thane? :)

It's hard to say without playing with them. I'm not sure I like Strength to hit points, because I would think of a lean, wiry type as being strong but small. I also worry that you might have nerfed Size a bit too much; Knockdown and Damage are definitely both very important, but Size is also the attribute most likely to come back to bite you. That is, you're unlikely to find yourself in a situation where you're too strong or fast or tough, but you could absolutely be too big.

But I'd be willing to play with those - they don't look bad to me.

In this case, it bothers me because you're taking a number, dividing it by 2, and then multiplying it by 2, and getting a different number than you started with.


Don't think it like that, think it of getting a new stat number, Knockdown, which no longer has anything to do with the original ones. It is like getting double healing rate with a critical Chirurgery: suddenly, you are healing 6 points instead of 3, even if your unrounded healing rate is 2.5 (doubled to 5). In the interests of simplicity, I doubt the one point difference in auto knockdown is huge, and since the rules are the same for everyone, it is fair.



It's hard to say without playing with them. I'm not sure I like Strength to hit points, because I would think of a lean, wiry type as being strong but small. I also worry that you might have nerfed Size a bit too much; Knockdown and Damage are definitely both very important, but Size is also the attribute most likely to come back to bite you. That is, you're unlikely to find yourself in a situation where you're too strong or fast or tough, but you could absolutely be too big.


Yeah, I was a bit worried that I may have made STR a bit too strong and SIZ a bit too weak... One option would be to do the hit points as (SIZ+STR)/2+CON, giving both SIZ and STR a role to play and hopefully balancing it all out. Downside being that it is a bit more clunky math than just summing two stats. But this is just a minor concern.

So the Derived Statistics would be:
Knockdown = (SIZ + DEX)/2
Major Wound = CON
Damage = (SIZ+STR)/6
Healing Rate = CON/5
Movement Rate = (STR+DEX)/10
Hit Points = (SIZ+STR)/2 + CON
Unconscious = HP/4

So the Derived Statistics would be:
Knockdown = (SIZ + DEX)/2
Major Wound = CON
Damage = (SIZ+STR)/6
Healing Rate = CON/5
Movement Rate = (STR+DEX)/10
Hit Points = (SIZ+STR)/2 + CON
Unconscious = HP/4

If you want to mitigate SIZ a bit, why don't you just use it as a negative with regards to movement?

Movement= (STR+DEX-SIZ)/5

Nice, easy, and somewhat intuitive if SIZ is approached from a Mass standpoint. STR is there to overcome SIZ, and DEX to give you a reaction advantage.

Oh, and for Major Wound, I would also include STR to represent a bit of toughness, so...

Major Wound=(STR+CON)/2

SDLeary

If you want to mitigate SIZ a bit, why don't you just use it as a negative with regards to movement?

This would mean that a midget would be a better sprinter than tall guys like Usain Bolt. If you look at Olympic sprinters, they are almost all tall guys. Stride length and all that.

Granted, I do follow your argument there. Big guy with low STR would be fat rather than fit, and yes, those extra pounds would slow him down. I am just not sure if that is supported by the rules as they are. SIZ contributes to the damage, for example, so clearly there is a component of STR in there, too. The longer arm as a lever doesn't hold up for thrusting weapons like the spear. Something to ponder.

I am less troubled by how this might impact on horses, as I don't think Animals should use the same Movement formula as humans anyway. Our bipedal mode of walking and running is quite special compared to the animal kingdom.



Oh, and for Major Wound, I would also include STR to represent a bit of toughness, so...

Major Wound=(STR+CON)/2


I think this would make STR too much of a good thing. STR is already the second best attribute in default rules, and giving it a role in Major Wound would cheapen CON and elevate STR even more.

This would mean that a midget would be a better sprinter than tall guys like Usain Bolt. If you look at Olympic sprinters, they are almost all tall guys. Stride length and all that.

Granted, I do follow your argument there. Big guy with low STR would be fat rather than fit, and yes, those extra pounds would slow him down. I am just not sure if that is supported by the rules as they are. SIZ contributes to the damage, for example, so clearly there is a component of STR in there, too. The longer arm as a lever doesn't hold up for thrusting weapons like the spear. Something to ponder.

I am less troubled by how this might impact on horses, as I don't think Animals should use the same Movement formula as humans anyway. Our bipedal mode of walking and running is quite special compared to the animal kingdom.

A little person, in theory, would also have a lower strength. Personally I wouldn't allow an 18 STR, 6 SIZ character. I'd pull out the old fanzine rule to have STR and SIZ vary by no more than 1.5x (RQ3/Hero magazine??).

Big (tall) with long legs does not make someone a good runner, they have to have the strength to be able to overcome their mass. There are plenty of sprinters that are small and wiry, whereas the are large athletes that are not so fast. Yao Ming was never an especially fast player on the court despite his 7'6" stature; most team mates and opponents were faster, despite being smaller with shorter legs. In Football (American) if you look at the really fast players, they tend to be those that are smaller (relatively speaking), though you will find the occasional really large fast player, even carrying all that armor.

In regards to damage, its the mass from size being pushed by the strength of the character that is causing the damage.

With regard to Olympic sprinters, they are also almost all muscle, very little fat on them. Take the same guy or gal, transform some of that muscle into non-muscle, and see if they can sprint as fast or run as long.

Quadrupeds are different. Their weight is distributed differently, and they have four running limbs instead of two. Those that are "designed" as runners also tend to be very lean in physical make-up, so strength overcoming mass is still an issue.


I think this would make STR too much of a good thing. STR is already the second best attribute in default rules, and giving it a role in Major Wound would cheapen CON and elevate STR even more.

Perhaps. I see CON as health, as as such think it should have a role in determining when a character perishes, or in their healing, or in fatigue. Not so much with regards to the ability to absorb damage though. That, to me, is much more meat and bones. Higher strength, is denser meat, everything else being equal.

SDLeary

I have played Pendragon since 1989. Siz is without question the most important stat, followed by Con, and then Str. Dex and App are clear dump stats. However, nerfing Siz is not the solution as much as giving a useful function to Dex and App.

Dex: use Dex for knockdown instead of Siz. I am a very large strong human, I have crap balance, I am not hard to knock down if you hit me low.

I would also resurect the feint tactic from earlier editions but make it even more powerful by not giving penalties to using it while armored. Knights are trained to fight in armor, and to look for vulnerabilities in their opponents defense.

App: Every point of APP above 12 gives +1 to effective skill for social skills like flirting, couresty etc.

Admittedly, I have not followed this entire thread.

However, I'd suggest making knockdown (Siz + Str)/2. Exceed that, make a Dex roll. Big, strong individuals are just harder to move around. Strong, small individuals, can brace themselves, but eventually mass matters. After that, agility matters to keep your feet. Make your Dex roll and you are knocked back, fail you're knocked down.

As for Str and Siz limitations, I don't think they are necessary as long as things like damage and knockdown come from derived traits. I envision a Str 18, Siz 6 character as a tiny, but musclebound guy. The low Siz reduces his damage and knockdown. He is just as strong as he can be for that size. A Size 18, Str 6 guy is weak and overweight. In the same vein, I'd use the average of Size and Str to make any "strength rolls". In fact, I usually want my Str higher than my Siz because it makes me envision my character as more 'fit' than the reverse would. Power-gaming be dammed, at least a little.

The thing with SIZ is that since you can't increase it after the character becomes 21, unlike STR which can be increased up to 34 years, the players tend to maximise SIZ at the beginning. It is simply so good.

In our Middle-Earth campaign, I decided to make SIZ cost double points compared to the rest of the stats (all stats started at 10, and then you had 12 points to distribute to them), and gave high social & performance skill defaults for APP, in addition to APP helping in courtly scenes. As the result, I think with the exception of one player, whose character concept was really being 'the big guy' of the team, most had SIZ of only 10 - 14. Of course, the subsequent +4 Numenorean SIZ bonus helped a lot... A couple of guys made APP their dump stat (sold down to 8, then +4 Numenorean bonus to 12), but the group courtier made hers 16+4 = 20, and other three were in the 14-17 range.

The thing with SIZ is that since you can't increase it after the character becomes 21, unlike STR which can be increased up to 34 years, the players tend to maximise SIZ at the beginning. It is simply so good.

In our Middle-Earth campaign, I decided to make SIZ cost double points compared to the rest of the stats (all stats started at 10, and then you had 12 points to distribute to them), and gave high social & performance skill defaults for APP, in addition to APP helping in courtly scenes. As the result, I think with the exception of one player, whose character concept was really being 'the big guy' of the team, most had SIZ of only 10 - 14. Of course, the subsequent +4 Numenorean SIZ bonus helped a lot... A couple of guys made APP their dump stat (sold down to 8, then +4 Numenorean bonus to 12), but the group courtier made hers 16+4 = 20, and other three were in the 14-17 range.

Increasing the cost of SIZ only patches part of the issue and that fix will feel punitive to many players. The larger issue is that in a game with only five attributes one is nearly worthless and another total worthless. I love this game, I think GS is a grandmaster of game design, but that in an issue. Dex and App meaning something is a better fix than just making SIZ more costly. My off the top of my head suggestions were not good, but I think the general idea of make other things more important rather than nerfing SIZ or inreasing its cost is the right idea conceptually.

You may have missed that we have increased the function of APP in our game.

Increasing the cost of SIZ at the beginning of the game for all player characters, who all have the same bonuses, by the way, is not punitive. It is a house rule, applied equally to everyone. With SIZ costing more, it is more difficult to get it up to 18 + bonus, which means that DEX plays more of a role as knockdown rolls become more common. Also, we have some DEX skill defaults, too. In effect, the skill defaults from APP and DEX help to 'recover' some of the points used on stats, since less Winter Trainings need to be used on the skills. And, as mentioned, we have the APP rolls at Court, too.

I am not saying that this is the perfect way or the only way to address nerfing SIZ. We'll see how it works in game, but if character generation is any indication, it has accomplished its main goal of making SIZ less of a superstat. Compared to our Vanilla KAP campaign, where ALL knights started with SIZ 17 or 18, now we have one knight at 18 (+4) and the rest at 10-14 (+4). I would be interested in hearing how your experiment with DEX for Knockdown and APP bonus to social skills works out.

I was thinking the APP bonus as well, but the one thing about a flat bonus is that it becomes very very powerful when your modified skill is pushed to 21+ (normally only achievable by spending Glory Bonus Points). It also means that there is absolutely no reason to boost your social skills by Yearly Training past 15; just boost your APP and you get +1 to everything! In fact, you might just rely on experience checks until you become 35, and get that APP to the max first, if you are playing a courtier. Time enough to get the skill up when you can't increase your APP anymore. That being said, +6 to Social Skills (18-12 = 6) gives you 'just' skill 15+6=21 before the skill increase slows down. It probably is not enough to unbalance the game. But it is also +6 to Flirting and Orate, too, making it somewhat more powerful... Especially if you combine it with the Glory Skill Bonus (which we don't use since it made a mockery of a courtier's niche, with the glorious combat monsters outshining them at Court), which can easily boost the skills by +5 or more, too.

Hmm. Definitely something to ponder some more. I might be inclined to adopt something like (APP-10)/2, rounding towards 0, as the bonus/penalty. In other words, every 2 full points off from 0 is +1/-1 depending which way you are going. This would give the APP 18 courtier +4 rather than +6, and cut the fast increase off at 19. Or you could do (APP-10)/3 and round normally, thus 12-14 = +1, 15-17=+2, 18-20 = +3. I might suggest that latter one to my players to see how they feel about it, since, as said, we already get some use out of APP.

As a quick comparison, in our Vanilla KAP campaign, the importance of stats has been (as indicated by starting stats at chargen): SIZ, STR, CON, DEX, APP. SIZ and STR give Damage, which is of paramount importance. The difference between 4d6 and 6d6 is one between impotence and dominance in combat, and 6d6 vs. 5d6 is a very lopsided fight, too. Taking Knockdown out of SIZ might help to balance it against STR and CON, and elevate DEX, true, but as Eothar points out, there are some conceptual problems with that. Despite how good one's balance is, mass is mass, and for the same DEX, a bigger SIZ should be harder to knock down than a lower SIZ, since it takes more force. One compromise there would be to make Knockdown (SIZ+DEX)/2, which has been mentioned in this very same thread before, too.

In my latest home game we've instituted a big ol' pile of modified rules and after a couple sessions including the Battle of Salisbury (we began in 480) they seem to be working out.

A big one makes APP more important by calling out 3 separate types of Glory: Action, Court, Status. Action is gained for deeds, mainly combat. It works exactly as per RAW though I have made a modified sheet with the most common enemies listed so each year they can just tick off on the line each time they defeat one. Status is the annual Glory wrapped up again according to RAW with a place on the sheet to track each sort (income, upkeep, entourage, passions, etc).

The big difference is Courtly Glory. The way its awarded is by RAW: make a skill roll in an appropriate scene and get Ordinary (et al) Glory for a success. The change is that I define Ordinary to be your APP instead of 10 and all non-combat Glory gained in game is a multiple of this amount. I reason that this sort of Glory is gained due to other people wanting to talk about you so being attractive makes that more likely.