Since the default KAP 5.1 is starting at 485, there are some little pitfalls that an unwary GM might stumble on if he is not careful. This post is intended to help.

1. FAMILY HISTORY, BIRTH YEAR AND STARTING CHARACTERS
This is obvious. Assuming that the PK is 21 by 480, he needs to be born in 459 (or, as I prefer to do it for bookkeeping, winter 458, which means he will turn 21 in the Winter Phase of 479, and is thus knighted and ready for 480). This means that the birth years in the Family history need to be tweaked. The easiest way to do it is just push the father's and the PK's birth years back by 5 years or so (or even 6, if you use my notation). Since the Grandfather was born in 410, this is still OK; instead of being 28-29 when the father is born, he is 23-24, no changes needed to his birth date. Note, I would personally prefer to start the game with the PK fathers still alive (see below), so I would simply give them 'plot immunity': they won't die by random rolls in Family History.

I recommend starting as 21-year old knights, by the way. If you start with the PKs' fathers, you miss out the chance to build up your own character's Glory and standing. Also, if you start as squires, again, you are pretty much just a spectator when great things are being done around you. No, starting as a young knight of your own is the best option, in my opinion.

2. CHANGES TO THE SETTING & (especially) INTRODUCTORY SCENARIOS
Since this is happening 5 years prior to the KAP setting, there are a couple of things that one needs to be aware of:
A) Count Roderick is UNMARRIED in 480. This also means that he doesn't have a daughter, and definitely not a son.
B) Because of A), the rivalry for Lady Ellen is still in the future, and Sir Blains of Levcomagus is still 'Sir Who?' as far as Roderick knows, and the Skirmish at Allington scenario would happen in 485 or later, instead.
C) Pellinore is still a young man. I would save The Questing Beast encounter actually to 492 or 493, since in 492, the envoys of Norgales are looking for him, and that would make the encounter all the more interesting for the PKs, since they have some idea how badly this obsession is wrecking Pellinore's kingdom. Otherwise, you'd have to explain why it takes 12 years for people to start to notice that this is a problem.
D) There are many more changes, such as Uther still being Prince Uther and the King being his older brother, Aurelius Ambrosius, but those should be obvious to any GM reading the expansion.

3. HEIRESSES
Forget about the heiresses in KAP 5.1. Their fathers/brothers/husbands are still very much alive; I'd kill them off in the battles of 484 and thus free up the heiresses for 485 as in KAP 5.1. Furthermore, see Greg's post about "Heiresses, Revised", which brings their landholdings to a more reasonable level:
http://nocturnal-media.com/forum/index.php?topic=2364.msg21844#msg21844
HOWEVER, and I can't emphasize this enough, A WET-BEHIND THE EARS, RECENTLY KNIGHTED PK OF 21-YEARS AND 1500 GLORY OR SO HAS NO CHANCE WHATSOEVER TO BE GRANTED AN HEIRESS!!! I see this happening again and again in peoples' campaigns, where the starting assumption seems to be that since the heiresses are in the main rulebook, the PKs are intended to marry one of them each. While Your Pendragon May Vary (or Will Vary, as seems to be Greg's preferred shorthand nowadays), it so much isn't the intended default. The heiresses go to those who have done great deeds, and they are for the Count to dole out (with the exception of Lady Indeg). Now, by pushing the starting time back five years will give the PKs some more time to gain enough Glory and do enough great deeds that MAYBE they have a reasonable chance, with a couple of years of wooing and the Sword Lake adventure. I find this to be a very good thing, especially in the case of some of the younger heiresses, where you can actually wait until after the Battle of Lindsey (490) (or even the Battle of Terrabil, 491), too. So the PKs will have a decade to do great deeds (several big battles, the Sword Lake adventure) to impress the Count. And THAT would be the appropriate moment to start giving out heiresses to the PKs, not right at the beginning of the campaign!

4. HOW I WOULD START A CAMPAIGN IN 480
1) Do the Bear of Imber intro in Autumn 479 (ignoring any references to Sir Blains and Pellinore, as those are much better later on).
2) The PKs are knighted at the end of 479, and since (by GM fiat) their fathers are still alive, they become household knights for Count Roderick.
3) I'd probably let them marry as household knights already, at the start of 480, to ensure that they'll get an early start on those heirs. The brides in question are picked by the fathers in agreement with the Count. (Alternatively, you could let the PKs look for their own brides, but see a note about heiresses above.)
4) The fathers' die in the climactic battles of 480: Battle of Menevia and Salisbury (now two separate battles).
5) Manors are taken over by the Count for 481: a chance to show how the inheritance works and also to give the Players some more time before landholding becomes an issue.
6) End of 481 or Start of 482: the PKs are confirmed as vassal knights and they get their lands. The Count waives the relief payment (or the fathers' had it in treasury for just this occasion). The PKs should get married at the latest around this time (NOT TO HEIRESSES).

I'd also tweak the family tree so that each PK has a couple of younger brothers, about 5 and 10 years younger than he is (+-2 years to prevent too much 'clumping' of PK ages). This gives each Player a couple of 'spares' to use if his main knight snuffs it in one of the big battles, or in the Infamous Feast, until the main branch heir grows up (assuming there is even a main branch heir... some of my players' knights didn't manage that and the family manor went to the brother instead).


EDIT:
Based on luckythirteen comments below, I am now convinced that it would be better to let the PKs' fathers die at the Battle of Mt. Damen in 484 rather than during the Battle of Salisbury 480. This keeps the PKs nicely as household knights through 480 and 485 (1 year hold on the reassessment of the manor), allowing them to tag along Count Roderick and give a bit better progression on the story & PK status. However, if this is done, then one should seriously consider, IMHO, letting them marry already in 480 and start producing those heirs!

Great ideas. In particular, I cannot agree more strongly with the suggestion to start as Household Knights. A few reasons for this:

1. It gives the PKs something to strive towards and illustrates how rare and powerful a Vassal Knight really is. Starting as squires, moving to Household Knights, then being given lands only after their fathers die helps create a sense of progression for the players.

2. Keeping the Fathers alive allows the GM to illustrate how powerful and respected the Vassal Knight really is. If I recall correctly, around 70-80% of Knights are Household Knights? Roderick is more generous than many others so the numbers of enfoeffed Knights in Salisbury may be higher, but it's still a pretty big deal. The Fathers can feel powerful, acting as trusted loyal Knights for the Count, interacting with the more powerful officers in Salisbury, giving the PKs a chance to see people they otherwise may not have the chance to interact with.

3. As Household Knights there is less autonomy. The Uther era is intended to be "training wheels" for the GPC. They have a built in quest giver in Roderick. They can serve as bodyguards and overhear things. They can do as the Count requests and don't have to come up with too many ideas on their own. You can really focus the lense in close on life as a Household Knight, not the grand scope of the GPC. Then when the players have the chance to chose their own "quests" it will feel like the game is opening up for them.

4. They can really get to know life at the Castle of the Rock and the town of Sarum Rock. They can meet the Count's chaplain and see the important role he fills. They can observe the lifestyle of the rich and famous, introducing the PKs to concepts and cultural roles and titles they might not otherwise be familiar with.

I would even suggest you could keep some of the Fathers alive all the way until the Battle of Mt. Damen in 484, allowing the PKs to fill their roles as Vassal Knights starting in 485 at the start of the GPC proper.

This is good stuff, thanks. I like the idea of them being bachelor knights for a few years, makes getting your own land so much more appreciated

I would even suggest you could keep some of the Fathers alive all the way until the Battle of Mt. Damen in 484, allowing the PKs to fill their roles as Vassal Knights starting in 485 at the start of the GPC proper.


One could very well do that, or even keep the father's alive all the way to the Battle of Lindsey (490), if one wants to. The Battle of Eburacum would be my pick for the 484 death, since the Battle of Mt. Damen is more of a surprise attack on the Saxons in turn; most of the casualties in 484 would have been at the Battle of Eburacum.

When I started GPC (485), I kept the fathers' alive as long as the dice gave them (Family Events can be pretty brutal), until the Battle of Lindsey where I got rid of the last couple of them. Worked just fine. All the more so since some of the players were new; it is easier for them if they don't have to worry about land. And, like you say, it makes for a better progression.

Morien, thanks for the great follow-up on this. I was thinking about how the timing of the family history from 5.1 would be changed by now starting the campaign in 480 when I asked about how those years were handled in the other thread, so this is exactly what I was looking for. Really, really can't wait to get my hands on this book!

Yeah, keeping the "Fathers" around until Lindsey (or even Duke Gorlois' surprise attack at Terrabil) would work really well too. It also allows HHKs to be rewarded with a Manor for battlefield heroics as well, particularly if the lands had been gifted to their fathers rather than granted. Something like "In recognition of your father's sacrifice and your bravery in battle, I am granting you the lands I had gifted to your father, may your family serve Salisbury for generations to come...". If the manor starts as gifted rather than granted, that too becomes a "carrot" of sorts to reward the PKs. Even better, it's leverage that Countess Ellen could have during Anarchy to reward loyal service.

I think the most important thing (besides the more natural sense of progression) is that it helps keep the lense of the campaign focused on Salisbury where the PKs can be very influential instead of the "EPIC BRITAIN" scope of the GPC where the PK's really aren't powerful enough to change the story and can sometimes feel "along for the ride". Said differently, having meaningful, achievable rewards during the Uther era allows a GM to focus the scope of the GPC to a scale that the players can impact directly. I think it fits the "training wheels" approach of the Uther era more effectively. Obviously every campaign will be different, but the early phase of the GPC could take a "Uther = HHK", "Anarchy = Manor", "Boy King = "Estate") approach for the target progression that IMHO would more closely match the PK's glory levels (assuming they survive of course). There would always be room to promote early for exceptional behavior, but this gives PKs achievable rewards for each era. I like it.

I think it fits the "training wheels" approach of the Uther era more effectively. Obviously every campaign will be different, but the early phase of the GPC could take a "Uther = HHK", "Anarchy = Manor", "Boy King = "Estate") approach for the target progression that IMHO would more closely match the PK's glory levels (assuming they survive of course). There would always be room to promote early for exceptional behavior, but this gives PKs achievable rewards for each era. I like it.


I am with you until the end of Anarchy. Estate should NEVER be a default assumption, in my opinion. It is a huge thing to get. Is it possible? Yes, of course. But it should not be taken as a 'default' for each PK to become an estate holder during Boy King.

My own pacing is, roughly, 1 new granted manor per generation. Given that many players have adopted a more Merovingian style of dividing the family holdings between the sons (the eldest gets the ancestral manor, the second son gets the earned manor), this is keeping the amount of land dispersed more. While at the same time encouraging those cadet branches to thrive and provide spares... Of course, there are some adventures that can give more lands, and the post-Badon land-grab of formerly Saxon lands gives lots of opportunity for the PKs to get a manor. But I would not be handing out an Estate each. :)

Here's my thoughts on starting in 479-480:

For the battles in 480, GMs may want to have the PKs be present at only one of them, to ease players into the battle system. A group of new players might view Menevia with the standard range of emotions, but when they have to fight the Battle of Salisbury afterwards they might be more apprehensive ("I haven't healed yet! I'm still being chirurgerized! I nearly died at Menevia, are you trying to kill me, GM?").

With regards to the heiress situation, if their fathers are still alive and the PK's fathers are as well, wouldn't the smart thing to do from the PK's fathers standpoint be to arrange marriages? Granted, of the known heiresses, only Elaine and Gwiona would be on the market, so to speak (Indeg would presumably be still married and Adwen's father might be hoping to could produce a son). This could make an excellent twist when the fathers die in battle and the heiress becomes the ward of the Count, who is looking for a rather more distinguished class of knight to reward.

It's also worth noting that the PK's would not be your average household knights. They are heirs in their own right, so there would be more of a reason for the Count to take care of them. After all, if the PK thinks the Count is a fine lord, then the Count is more likely to have a loyal Vavasour to call on.

The PKs might be able to aid the Count in his efforts to find a bride, which would not only let them bask in his generosity, but would also further personalize the rivalry with Levcomagus. It's one thing to be told in 485 that Levcomagus and Salisbury are raiding each other over who married whom, its another thing entirely when the players have had a hand in establishing that rivalry in the first place.

Lastly, the PK's fathers should die within 1 to 2 years of each other, like Morien suggested. This is to prevent Sir X getting his inheritance in 480 while Sir Y must wait till 490 to come into his own, and forestalls harebrained schemes to gain the inheritance early or to bring the 'lucky' newly-minted vavasour down a notch (as well as the player of Sir Y accusing Sir X of bribing the GM somehow).

Here's my thoughts on starting in 479-480:

For the battles in 480, GMs may want to have the PKs be present at only one of them, to ease players into the battle system. A group of new players might view Menevia with the standard range of emotions, but when they have to fight the Battle of Salisbury afterwards they might be more apprehensive ("I haven't healed yet! I'm still being chirurgerized! I nearly died at Menevia, are you trying to kill me, GM?").


Battles of Menevia and Salisbury are explicitly happening at the same time, so they cannot be in more than one of them. Of course, you could allow them to play their fathers in the other battle. Or save it for the replay. :)



With regards to the heiress situation, if their fathers are still alive and the PK's fathers are as well, wouldn't the smart thing to do from the PK's fathers standpoint be to arrange marriages? Granted, of the known heiresses, only Elaine and Gwiona would be on the market, so to speak (Indeg would presumably be still married and Adwen's father might be hoping to could produce a son). This could make an excellent twist when the fathers die in battle and the heiress becomes the ward of the Count, who is looking for a rather more distinguished class of knight to reward.


It would, but if you see my rant (in above and in Heiresses Revised -thread), it is unlikely that the PKs' fathers have that kind of pull (they tend to have around 2000 Glory from Family History, making them rather unremarkable vassal knights in their 40s). And the PKs themselves definitely won't have, having just been knighted. Heiresses are RARE, and their fathers can probably find estate holders or at least knights with more than one manor who would be more than happy to marry an heiress, and naturally such wealthy suitors would be more to the heiress' father's liking. Even some older vassal knight who doesn't have a son yet, but has a solid reputation, would likely be a preferable candidate to an heir of a manor, who might have to wait a decade or two for the old man to finally die. I mean, the fathers' certainly could try to do arrange an heiress to their sons, but they would be very unlikely to succeed.

Not to mention that I'd consider it CHEATING to have my NPCs pave the road for the PKs like that: you'd better earn that heiress on your own merit, sonny! :P And also my own overwhelming desire to pack those heiresses away until 485, when it is might become feasible that the PKs might be allowed to woo them, after their fathers/husbands die in 484.

Now the fathers could most likely arrange marriages to eldest (non-heiress) daughters of vassal knights, bringing in dowries of the order of £1d6+5 (or whatever we set it in Entourage), who would be the 'default' wife candidates. And this I would encourage, just to get the PKs starting their own dynasties as soon as possible, given how difficult it can be. PKs having loads of kids is good for the GM, too: all those sisters needing to get married, all those younger brothers as spares and needing knighting and gear and positions... i.e. ready-made plot hooks. :)



It's also worth noting that the PK's would not be your average household knights. They are heirs in their own right, so there would be more of a reason for the Count to take care of them. After all, if the PK thinks the Count is a fine lord, then the Count is more likely to have a loyal Vavasour to call on.


Of course, but by the same token, the Count has other 20+ vavasour heirs to take care of, too. The PKs are special compared to normal Household Knights, but they are not the Golden Boys just yet. They'll need to earn that.



The PKs might be able to aid the Count in his efforts to find a bride, which would not only let them bask in his generosity, but would also further personalize the rivalry with Levcomagus. It's one thing to be told in 485 that Levcomagus and Salisbury are raiding each other over who married whom, its another thing entirely when the players have had a hand in establishing that rivalry in the first place.


Have you been reading my emails? :P



Lastly, the PK's fathers should die within 1 to 2 years of each other, like Morien suggested. This is to prevent Sir X getting his inheritance in 480 while Sir Y must wait till 490 to come into his own, and forestalls harebrained schemes to gain the inheritance early or to bring the 'lucky' newly-minted vavasour down a notch (as well as the player of Sir Y accusing Sir X of bribing the GM somehow).


I agree that it is best to make the 'transition' roughly simultaneous, which is why my preference would be to either fudge the family event rolls ('Your father dies due to an illness, congratulations, you are inheriting the manor') or 'fate' their deaths in some nice big battle (Battle of Eburacum works beautifully). Of course, you can let one die against Levcomagus, another murdered by a dastardly knight, and a third die against the Saxons, and fourth disappearing... And thus have all sorts of different hooks in there. :)

All good considerations. But I am left with one question: Why would you want to start in 480 instead of 485? What do you expect from the extra 5 years?

Starting 480 gives a chance to see the rise as well as the fall of Uther. Starting in 485 you start at the height of his power.
I can name this one thing, but wonder if there are other reasons people want to start earlier?

All good considerations. But I am left with one question: Why would you want to start in 480 instead of 485? What do you expect from the extra 5 years?

Starting 480 gives a chance to see the rise as well as the fall of Uther. Starting in 485 you start at the height of his power.
I can name this one thing, but wonder if there are other reasons people want to start earlier?


I'd say to show the transition of Britain from the one of our history books to the one of Monmouth and Malory. I actually stated out Menevia to represent this when I did a fan version of this concept, having an early feudal army of chainmail-wearing knights, archers, and spearman going up against Pascent's tribal army of hill men, Saxons, and Irish; sort of a reverse Hastings, if you will.

All good considerations. But I am left with one question: Why would you want to start in 480 instead of 485? What do you expect from the extra 5 years?

Starting 480 gives a chance to see the rise as well as the fall of Uther. Starting in 485 you start at the height of his power.
I can name this one thing, but wonder if there are other reasons people want to start earlier?


1. Uther's period begins 480. It is kinda odd that we skip over the beginning in GPC & KAP 5.1. Book of Uther offered a nice chance to add those missing 5 years.

2. Like you say, we will get to see the rise and fall of Uther, thus making it more interesting (to me, at least), rather than jumping in at the middle.

3. Extra 5 years of gameplay is not a bad thing in my book, either. Especially as loads of interesting things happen during those 5 years, setting the stage for the enmity of Uther and Gorlois for one, and those big, famous Battles like Menevia, Salisbury and Mt. Damen.

4. Dynastic play: The extra 5 years also give a bit more of a buffer to get those sons born in time to be grown up by Boy King (assuming you allow PKs to marry as household knights, which I personally would encourage; dynastic play is really where KAP distinguishes itself, and anything that helps towards that goal...). The 5 more years mean that the PKs will be at the height of their physical prowess (around mid-30s) at 495, making them even better able to take the lead in Salisbury (assuming they survive). On the other hand, they will be in their early 50s by the time Arthur comes along, but their sons are likely in their twenties, still. Just the right time to start racking up the glory for the second generation in Arthur's wars. Incidentally, the second generation will be slowing down by 530s, when the big wars are over, and the questing and tournaments begin just as the third generation is saddling up. And the fourth generation is coming to their own at the aftermath of the Grail Quest, experiencing the Twilight.

5. As I have said here, those extra 5 years also give more chance to tweak the beginning setup, i.e. having the PKs as household knights in the beginning, and also keeping those heiresses off the table until the PKs actually rack up enough Glory and great deeds to become worthy of them. Granted, this is more of a GMing choice which one could have done also at the start of 485.

6. Frankly, (about) +50% to the game play time where BoU will be valid is not a bad thing in my opinion, either. 11 years can go fast, especially if you are doing 1 year / session and playing weekly. 16 years gives a bit more time to let the PKs accomplish something in Uther's court, should the players and the GM be so inclined.

7. It makes the PKs a bit less of the 'Chosen Ones' marked for great fate by Merlin in 486, when they already have 6 years of experience under their belt. Which is a bonus in my mind (YPMW), as it explains better why the Count cuts them more slack: they are not only the heroes of the hour, but they are also proven knights, whom he likely knows very well, if they served as household knights under him -> makes the events of 492 even more reasonable.

I am sure there are other reasons, those were just some of the top of my head.

And I might add this:

8. It will give the PKs a chance to be involved in the whole Roderick-Ellen-Blains triangle, thus see the start of the whole Salisbury-Levcomagus feud.

Excellent analysis as always, Morien.


Thanks,


T.

After much anticipation I finally started the Great Pendragon Campaign, with the new start date of 480 to boot. Right away I realized that I'd have to change the PK's birth year if I was to play as written. I didn't like that idea as it was already tidy in the timeline that the PKs were baby boomers from the Night of the Long Knives. So I opted for something a little original.

Instead what I did was have my players create their PKs as normal, and then told them to clone the characters. We aged them five years (the max) and then adjusted the age to coincide with their father's age. We skipped the aging rules for these PKs as I didn't want them to be overly weak. From there I told my players that they were playing their fathers for the first five years. Kind of a prologue if you will which allowed us to learn how to play the game, begin improving their manors, and all the while knowing that these were temporary characters not long for the world. We've played 480-482 so far and its been a blast for everyone involved as we've used the Extended Campaign as our literal tutorial in fighting battles, the economics, and just plain how to play Pendragon.

What I find really rewarding is being there from the beginning of Uther's reign and his consolidation. My players are already suspicious of the new King and are wary of him, as the Supreme Collegium apparently is as well. Plus my PK Father Knights have had new sons, flirted, and made names for themselves far over the very meager knights they would have been by just rolling their history. They've fought for Salisbury, they abstained from pillaging Bedegraine and Summerland, and they've met Madoc and have feelings and so much immersion in the game already after two sessions (three years).

And that my friends is what I always wanted. My players are enjoying the "world", not just rolling some dice and killing a monster. The extra Uther years are a bit sparse on events and they seem quicker and shorter then the GPC. It has been a great tutorial, maybe even as intended. I've been left thinking about starting the game even earlier sometime, so we can explore how great Aurellius must have been, perhaps the young Merlin, or the coming of the Saxons...


Quick question, fellow knights: When does Roderick marry Ellen? I hadn't realized this was an event that hadn't taken place. Now I'd like to add that to my campaign as well.

Glad you are enjoying it.

There are some really big flaws at the way the Family History is now, with ALL the fathers (just recently knighted knights without major families or Glory of their own) marrying heiresses (they are not that common nor easy to get, trust me). Not just world-wise (the previous points) but from the dynastic side as well: your paternal cousins will NEVER inherit that manor if you run out of brothers. And you cannot have any legitimate siblings of your mother, or they would have inherited (men) or been co-heiresses (women). So you can't have anyone in the maternal side inheriting, either. Bye bye manor. It is so much easier to ignore that bit and have the manors be paternal ones, handed down from a grandfather to a father.

Anyway, I am glad that doing it your way has paid off. :)



Quick question, fellow knights: When does Roderick marry Ellen? I hadn't realized this was an event that hadn't taken place. Now I'd like to add that to my campaign as well.

483. Jenna is born 484, Robert 492.

Interesting thread. I'm going to take another crack at the GPC next month with a new group and I'm looking at the 480 start. I've been considering using the dates as they are, and starting the characters at 16, knighted early for reasons (probably along the lines of "There's a whole lot of Saxons out there, we need more troops). Keeping the fathers alive until 484 sounds good- have them finishing their training as household knights, and not having to deal with manors right away (I know it's been superseded, but I do like the Book of Manor, though I'm not sure my players will share my love of bookkeeping).

Although USKnight's idea of playing the fathers for five years is pretty inspired. I may steal that.

I've been considering using the dates as they are, and starting the characters at 16, knighted early for reasons (probably along the lines of "There's a whole lot of Saxons out there, we need more troops).

The problem with this:
If the PKs are born in 464 as (mistakenly) is in KAP 5.1, they are ONLY reaching their 15th birthday in the Winter of 479 (20th birthday in Winter 484, they should have been born in 463 to be 21 at the start of 485*), so they are practically novice squires. Either you'll have to give them a huge break at the start (starting with the skills and stats equivalent of a 21-year old knight) or they will really, really struggle.

Much easier to push back the marriage and the subsequent birth (at the same year) of the PK to 458, and explain the heiress situation (I really wish you wouldn't use the heiresses, as you can tell from my previous post) with the Battle of Kent in 457. This gives you 21-year old PKs at 479 without any extra handwaving. As for Father's history, you can just have him be knighted 5 years earlier, too, and simply not accomplish much during that time (or just ignore any results of death, rolling as if for a Grandfather).

* To briefly return to the canonical family history... The PKs have to be 20 year old at the start of 485, if they are baby boomers after the Night of the Long Knives. But since this is just a one year shift and you have the bloody Battles of 484 just prior, this is easy to handwave. Or you can just ignore it, as I imagine most people have done without checking the math. :P



Although USKnight's idea of playing the fathers for five years is pretty inspired. I may steal that.

If that floats your boat, sure.

Personally, I would not do that, for several reasons:
1) You'd have to make another character for those five years. You'll also have to ensure that the father is alive to be played (not a huge hurdle, as I do like keeping the fathers alive for a few years anyway).
2) You lose character development of your main character for those five years.
3) Your main character loses actual campaign/plot development for those five years. Rather than being there at Roderick's side as he marries Ellen, your main character is still a squire. Rather than potentially catching Uther's eye in Bedegraine or Summerland, they are still squires to be ignored. You basically reset their brownie point counter with the change from the Father to the Son, and thus miss out on the opportunity to actually interact more in Uther's Court and cultivate some contacts and relationships there, too.
4) Your main character loses the huge load of Glory that is coming from Battles of Salisbury, Eburacum and Mt. Damen. (Granted, some may see this as a good thing.)
5) Points 3-4 also help to explain why Roderick gives the PKs such preferential treatment in 486 and later sticks his own neck out for them in 492; they didn't just luck into helping Merlin, but have been loyal and probably glorious knights the whole decade. Also, it prepares them for Anarchy, allowing them to be at the height of their power then (mid-30s in 495), perfect for taking a leading role in the future of the County. That extra 5 years of experience matters.
6) It also gives the PKs more time to either court/earn the heiresses (if that is something the GM wishes to have happen; I think this angle is way too oversold in the older KAP books, especially given the changes in the numbers of vassal knights in later books like BotE & BotW), and (still) to get sons and heirs. My preference is that they have a male heir in place by late 480s, so that once Arthur pulls the Sword from the Stone in 510, they can send in the next generation. Actually, my preference would be to give the previous generation a glorious death in the Battle of the Netley March in 508. That is, if I were a Killing GM. O:)

Anyway, just some quick thoughts there. :)

The problem with this:
If the PKs are born in 464 as (mistakenly) is in KAP 5.1, they are ONLY reaching their 15th birthday in the Winter of 479 (20th birthday in Winter 484, they should have been born in 463 to be 21 at the start of 485*), so they are practically novice squires. Either you'll have to give them a huge break at the start (starting with the skills and stats equivalent of a 21-year old knight) or they will really, really struggle.

Much easier to push back the marriage and the subsequent birth (at the same year) of the PK to 458, and explain the heiress situation (I really wish you wouldn't use the heiresses, as you can tell from my previous post) with the Battle of Kent in 457. This gives you 21-year old PKs at 479 without any extra handwaving. As for Father's history, you can just have him be knighted 5 years earlier, too, and simply not accomplish much during that time (or just ignore any results of death, rolling as if for a Grandfather).

* To briefly return to the canonical family history... The PKs have to be 20 year old at the start of 485, if they are baby boomers after the Night of the Long Knives. But since this is just a one year shift and you have the bloody Battles of 484 just prior, this is easy to handwave. Or you can just ignore it, as I imagine most people have done without checking the math. :P


I've done the mental gymnastics in the past to make 21/born in 464 work before, but can't recall. Might be easier to go with your idea of ancestral manor and get the birth year right, whichever way I go. I haven't really looked over the core rules recently (the start of my preparing for a new campaign has involved checking out the expanded material in Uther and flipping through GPC), so it could be I'm overestimating how good characters are at 16.




If that floats your boat, sure.

Personally, I would not do that, for several reasons:
1) You'd have to make another character for those five years. You'll also have to ensure that the father is alive to be played (not a huge hurdle, as I do like keeping the fathers alive for a few years anyway).
2) You lose character development of your main character for those five years.
3) Your main character loses actual campaign/plot development for those five years. Rather than being there at Roderick's side as he marries Ellen, your main character is still a squire. Rather than potentially catching Uther's eye in Bedegraine or Summerland, they are still squires to be ignored. You basically reset their brownie point counter with the change from the Father to the Son, and thus miss out on the opportunity to actually interact more in Uther's Court and cultivate some contacts and relationships there, too.
4) Your main character loses the huge load of Glory that is coming from Battles of Salisbury, Eburacum and Mt. Damen. (Granted, some may see this as a good thing.)
5) Points 3-4 also help to explain why Roderick gives the PKs such preferential treatment in 486 and later sticks his own neck out for them in 492; they didn't just luck into helping Merlin, but have been loyal and probably glorious knights the whole decade. Also, it prepares them for Anarchy, allowing them to be at the height of their power then (mid-30s in 495), perfect for taking a leading role in the future of the County. That extra 5 years of experience matters.
6) It also gives the PKs more time to either court/earn the heiresses (if that is something the GM wishes to have happen; I think this angle is way too oversold in the older KAP books, especially given the changes in the numbers of vassal knights in later books like BotE & BotW), and (still) to get sons and heirs. My preference is that they have a male heir in place by late 480s, so that once Arthur pulls the Sword from the Stone in 510, they can send in the next generation. Actually, my preference would be to give the previous generation a glorious death in the Battle of the Netley March in 508. That is, if I were a Killing GM. O:)

Anyway, just some quick thoughts there. :)

1. As USKnight said, I'd just have them run the father as a clone, with a few more years experience. Surviving until then for the fathers, I think I'd adjust or ignore any of the "died in battle results".
2. Starting character development in 485 was good enough for years.
3. This is a good point.
4. Again, from a 485 start point, they'd already be getting just the 1/10 inherited glory.
5. Though going the other way, "Your fathers served me well, I expect good work out of you."
6. Here I'm going off a now almost 10-year old memory of my best campaign, where I think children were born a little after Arthur. That came to a close shortly after the sword came out, but I think again I was going to have some characters knighted early.

I think we're coming at it from different perspectives. It sounds to me like you're now viewing the 480-484 as an essential part of the campaign. Right now, I'm looking at it as something I've always just known as a couple pages in the family history. Playing it as the PK's fathers I think breathes a little more life into the most recent family history, show, not tell. It would also give the players (3 of the 4, this will be the first time playing) a chance to try things out without screwing up their characters. And, I am concerned what those five years bumping the PKs further along on aging.

I do appreciate your thoughts, even if it means I now need to go back and re-think everything :) Maybe if I can divorce myself from the 464 birth year, I'll split the difference and start the PKs at 18.

Just to clarify, it is your campaign and you do you. I am simply airing my own thoughts and preferences as to why I would do things in a certain way. :) Even if I happen to think that is a better way, it would be boring if everyone always did things the same way.



1. As USKnight said, I'd just have them run the father as a clone, with a few more years experience. Surviving until then for the fathers, I think I'd adjust or ignore any of the "died in battle results".
2. Starting character development in 485 was good enough for years.
3. This is a good point.
4. Again, from a 485 start point, they'd already be getting just the 1/10 inherited glory.
5. Though going the other way, "Your fathers served me well, I expect good work out of you."
6. Here I'm going off a now almost 10-year old memory of my best campaign, where I think children were born a little after Arthur. That came to a close shortly after the sword came out, but I think again I was going to have some characters knighted early.


1. Personally, I am not terribly fond of clones. :) Also, in my experience, some players might resent giving away their 'badass' veteran knight to play the 21-year beginning knight. Not saying this is necessarily a problem; in Pendragon, knights die, and everyone has to switch at some point. If you kill all the Fathers off in 484 anyway, it is not like anyone has a choice of continuing.

2. Just because something works doesn't mean that it couldn't be improved. :)

3. Thank you.

4. Yep, but 10% is much less than 100%.

5. Yes, but that is much weaker excuse than: "You have already served me well and now this! Well done, lads!". Also, there is the experience angle during the Anarchy.

6. Quick number crunching exercise: Assuming about 40% yearly birth rate, 50/50 gender split and 70% survival rate, you'd expect about two kids every 5 years, and maybe three surviving ones per decade. Starting in 485 makes it a coin toss if you will have an adult son by 509-510. Starting in 480 increases the chances by a lot.



I think we're coming at it from different perspectives. It sounds to me like you're now viewing the 480-484 as an essential part of the campaign. Right now, I'm looking at it as something I've always just known as a couple pages in the family history. Playing it as the PK's fathers I think breathes a little more life into the most recent family history, show, not tell. It would also give the players (3 of the 4, this will be the first time playing) a chance to try things out without screwing up their characters. And, I am concerned what those five years bumping the PKs further along on aging.

As essential as any other stretch of 5 years, with the exception of the start of the Boy King and the end of the GPC leading to Camlann, IMHO. That is, you can skip it, but playing through it enhances the campaign, IMHO, for the reasons already stated.

A big big argument for playing it is that you will otherwise skip one third of Uther's reign. Presumably, you bought BoU with the intent of using it. By starting the (real) PKs in 485 instead of 480 you are robbing yourself valuable years to use the book in your campaign. All the more so since you shorten the PK careers under Uther, thus cutting exactly to the latter part of their careers when they finally might start interacting on the higher level in Uther's Court, rather than just be in the sidelines. You will get less use out of those numerous high ranking NPCs in Book of Uther, simply because you don't give the PKs time to grow in Glory and reputation to attract their attention. I am not saying that your campaign should revolve around Uther's Court (mine didn't, although it predated BoU's publication), but it is one of those things you should keep in mind when planning your new campaign.

As for screwing up their characters, a better idea, IMHO, would be to keep the fathers alive and let them start playing the eldest sons. If they are unhappy with them after a few years, you can always have them die in a battle/adventure and bring in the spare, making a new character who will inherit the father. Especially since that is what you'd have to do anyway, given that the father was a clone?

As for Aging, I don't think that is a problem. I actually prefer the generational split that starting in 480 accomplishes:
480 - 495: The rise of the PKs to be the leading knights in Salisbury.
496 - 509: The PKs, at the height of their prowess, act as the trusted advisors and leaders of men in Salisbury.
510 - 518: The old guard gives way (or die in 508, to hammer in the desperation of the Anarchy) and the 2nd generation PKs rally to young Arthur. They are the new knights, chivalrous rather than the more brutish knights of Uther & Anarchy Periods. Having earned their Glory in Arthur's battles, they finally have the crucible of the Battle of Badon Hill to cement their reputations.
519 - 530: The 2nd generation PKs, if they survive Badon Hill, have a chance to reap rewards of the Saxon Conquest (maybe a chance to break out BotE, if the GM wishes to scale things up?). Having been with Arthur since the start, they likely have loads of Glory. They continue raking it in during the other wars of the 520s, against Picts, Saxons (, Cambrians) and Romans. Quite possibly earning a seat in the Round Table, too.
531 - 555: The 3rd generation PKs earn their spurs in adventuring in the Enchanted Britain, participating in tournaments, until finally vanishing in the Grail Quest. They'd be the amorous and the questing knights, more of Lancelot's and Tor's style than the earlier, more battle focused (but still chivalric) knights of the second generation.
555 - 565: The 4th generation PKs will see the Round Table torn asunder, and fight in the Battle of Camlann.

Granted, in practice it is very unlikely to be this neat, what with random deaths of the PKs and birth of heirs. While 5 years is not much of a shift, it will probably take the 4th generation out (or at least the players don't have time to get too invested with those characters). Also, my 'worry' would be that those dinosaurs of the first generation, if they survive all the way to Badon, will overshadow all the subsequent generations. That even happened in our first campaign (pre-GPC) where we started in 503 and used the Boy King from 510 onwards. The amount of Glory gained in 510 - 518 was so high that the subsequent PKs could only dream of that.

1. FAMILY HISTORY, BIRTH YEAR AND STARTING CHARACTERS
This is obvious. Assuming that the PK is 21 by 480, he needs to be born in 459 (or, as I prefer to do it for bookkeeping, winter 458, which means he will turn 21 in the Winter Phase of 479, and is thus knighted and ready for 480).


Whilst posting on this thread http://nocturnalmediaforum.com/iecarus/forum/showthread.php?2096-p-26-and-p-48-(birth-year-and-starting-age)&p=23754&viewfull=1#post23754 , I happened to reread the KAP 5.1 introductory scenario, which is clearly set on the end of the previous year to the Campaign start. So, if you are 'officially' starting in 480, the intro scenario is set in Autumn 479, followed by the knighting and the Winter Phase 479, which is when the PKs age to 21. (I see I already dealt with this in point 4 of the original post, but doesn't hurt to repeat.)

So with that in mind:
A) Birth year should be (Winter) 458.
B) The PKs should get one less miscellaneous point to reflect that they are still 20 years old at the start of the scenario. (They get the Yearly Training in the Winter Phase of 479 to make up for it. You can of course ignore this at your leisure, or simply skip the Step 7 in 479.)