There have been other LotR -conversion threads before ( http://nocturnalmediaforum.com/iecarus/forum/showthread.php?2294-Lord-of-the-Rings-Conversion and links therein), but I decided to start a new one, so that it is easily found and since my goals are somewhat different from many of those other threads.

The intent of this thread is to talk about using Pendragon system (as close as possible) to play a 3000+ year campaign as lords and ladies of Gondor, and the little tweaks that might be necessary to do that. Comments & questions are welcome on all aspects of it.

Let me start with the premise of the campaign I am planning, just to make it a bit clearer:


The player-characters start at the Downfall of Numenor (Second Age 3319), sailing to Middle-Earth with Isildur. They will gain noble titles (lord / lady) and lands in Ithilien, as vassals of King Isildur of Gondor. The starting estates would be comparable what a banneret might have in Pendragon, or around 10 manors worth. There will be opportunities to expand the holdings, although there wouldn't be the same kind of 'investment revolution' as there is in Pendragon. It would be more via good marriages & rewards (especially in the conquered territories as Gondor expands).

The idea would be really to see how the families evolve and react as the history of the Middle-Earth and Gondor unfolds, and especially what choices and actions the characters take at the 'crisis points'. Those crisis points would be played out with more Pendragonish timescale, so closer to year by year, although it might be that we'd do shorter couple of year skips in between, too, if nothing much is happening. Also, adventure timescale is of course more contracted, down to days and even hours at times. In essence, each of those crisis points would be roughly a mini-campaign of about 10 - 30 sessions covering roughly 10 - 50 years, depending on the nature of the exact crisis point. For example, the most obvious crisis point is the Kin-Strife (Third Age 1432 - 1447), the disastrous civil war of Gondor, during which the player-characters would take sides, likely depending on the decisions their ancestors had made during the previous thousand years or so. I have, provisionally, about 10 crisis points selected from the Gondorian history.

Between the crisis points, we'd likely skip ahead hundreds of years, perhaps rolling once per decade* to see if something interesting happens to the family, but it would be resolved in a roll or a decision and then move on, rather than actually playing it out in detail. (The really important stuff would likely be a crisis point anyway, so it would get played out.) My thinking is that people would rather have a bit more attachment to fewer characters and skip over 'uninteresting' generations, rather than spread the game time more evenly. I know I would get burned out if I would have to 'play' an estimated 80 generations (based on a quick calculation on a generational length), even if 90% of those generations would be oneshots each! So I am thinking it would be better to leave those intervening generations a bit more nebulous, not even bother making character sheets. Instead, the player can make the decision based on what kind of a family s/he wishes to play if a decision point comes up. For instance, will s/he marry off the heir/ess for money, purity of blood, or for love? That would be a decision point that repeats across the generations, and naturally has some impact on how the family evolves, perhaps literally. :P

* = I am a bit ambivalent on this rolling mechanism. It might be fun, but on the other hand, it might be easier to just skip to the next mini-campaign. We might try it out and see how it goes.

AGING

The obvious mumakil in the room is the lifespan of the Dunedain, which will cause some issues, since the Pendragon system has aging already at 35. That obviously won't work for the Dunedain, who regularly lived way past 100, the kings often reaching past 200. There is also the diminishing of the Dunedain, meaning that their lifespan became shorter as the time passed on. I was looking at the sources and online comments (in particular this fine page http://www.zarkanya.net/Tolkien/Decline%20of%20the%20Numenoreans.htm ), and finally decided that I'd like the non-royal Dunedain age a bit quicker than the Royal ones (for whom we have the most data from Tolkien's own pen, of course). Also, once the aging started, it was roughly as quick as for normal humans. (There was one King of Numenor (Tar-Atanamir) who refused to give up his lie when he was still strong in mind and body. He lived to be 421, whereas his father, Tar-Ciryatan, died at 401 years of age. So assuming they would otherwise had similar lifespans, Tar-Atanamir won about 20 years of extra life, but in decline.)

So, here is what I came up with (for comparison, the common men have adulthood at 20th birthday and aging starting at 40th birthday, just to keep everything nice and neat):
Numenor-born (1st characters): Aging rolls start every year from 160.
Born before 1000 TA (= Third Age): Aging rolls start every year from 140.
Born before 2000 TA: Aging rolls start every year from 120.
Born before 2500 TA: Aging rolls start every year from 100.
Born after 2500 TA: Aging rolls start every year from 80.
The above numbers are for pure-blood Dunedain. The mixed-blood Dunedain (common especially after Kin-strife) will start aging 20 years earlier.


YEARLY TRAINING

Even the mixed-blood Dunedain lifespan at the end of the Third Age will give a man roughly double the years that he is at his peak form compared to a non-Dunedain (20th to 60th = 40 years vs. 20th to 40th = 20 years). This is especially problematic from the statistics side, side it means that if nothing is done about the Yearly Training, he can, in principle, have 20 more points in Statistics and pretty much max them out. This is, for obvious reasons, undesirable. Also, especially when you move to earlier times, having 100 years more Yearly Trainings would make all Dunedain supermen. Now, granted, I have no problem of them being badasses. They most certainly were. But Aragorn, at 87-88 years of age (during the LotR books & movies), was not THAT much greater in strength and fighting than Boromir (aged 41). Sure, his endurance (Constitution, I'd say) was exceptional, to jog through Rohan. But he wasn't as good as make Eomer (age 28) look like a novice when it came to swordplay. In part, the Pendragon system helps here since it slows everything down after Skill 15, and prevents skill raises above 20 except with experience or Glory. Unfortunately, if you give someone 100 extra yearly trainings, they will max out pretty much all the skills that Pendragon has, and Statistics even sooner. So, it is a problem.

Here is my current solution to it:
Up to 40: normal Yearly Training (4 skill points up to 15, or 1 point to statistics/traits/skill 15+)
From 40 to 79: halved (2/0.5)
From 80 onwards: quartered (1/0.25)
No Statistics increases after the aging starts; for example, the 60 year old mixed-blood Dunadan in 3000 TA cannot raise the statistics anymore.

Furthermore, rather than starting out at 20, the Dunedain noblemen have some additional training, and are not considered to be ready until they are 30. In return for this extra training, they gain: Sindarin 10, Lore 10, Read 10, and 3 extra trait or passion points. (Lore is basically history and such, tales and legends. It replaces Faerie Lore.)
This helps to prevent the Dunedain from simply maxing their stats so easily.
Towards the end of the Third Age, the mixed-blood Dunedain neglect some of the old ways, and start the game at 25, with: Sindarin 6 and Read 10.

I might also introduce a cap, that you can have only X points in Stats, unless you have used Glory to raise them. I want the Dunedain to be good, but I don't want them to be Supermen with all stats at 20. This might or might not be necessary (see below).

The above Yearly Training results in these numbers:
Age 40: 20 (normal) yearly trainings
Age 60: 30 (normal) yearly trainings
Age 80: 40 (normal) yearly trainings
Age 100: 45 (normal) yearly trainings
Age 120: 50 (normal) yearly trainings
Age 140: 55 (normal) yearly trainings
Age 160: 60 (normal) yearly trainings (instead of 140)

Now, I know that this might not be as big of an issue most of the time. Like said, the intent is to play about 20-50 year long episodes, and I should have some say as the GM how old the player-characters are at the start of the episode. However, I do know that for instance the starting episode will actually be much longer than this, 100+ years. During that time, the characters will develop a LOT. And especially if someone manages to die and is replaced by the significantly younger heir, I would much rather flatten the curve at the end, to give them a bit of a chance to compete. For instance, the difference between a 80 year old Dunadan and a 120 year old Dunadan is just 10 Yearly Trainings, and given that both have probably maxed out their main weapons and many of their other skills are at 15, the older Dunadan simply has a couple of skills at 20 that the younger doesn't. Not a big deal.


EXPERIENCE

Experience will work as normal. Since we will NOT have an adventure every year (save perhaps if the episode is less than 20 years), I don't mind if the PCs gain experience checks and improve via them. It is earned and an average of 20 sessions (and max 1 experience check per skill/trait per session) will not be enough to unbalance the characters. We will not use solos, though, since they'd be a huge pain if we skip forward 20 years or so, and WOULD have a chance to unbalance the game if the skip is closer to that 100 years mentioned in the previous paragraph.


MARRIAGE AND CHILDBIRTH

The long lifespan of the Dunedain poses another problem. How to keep them from having huge families (which they didn't have, in the books)? Obviously, there are three ways to go about this:
1) Let them marry older. This limits the time they have to make offspring. Many Gondorian Kings sired their heir when they were past 100.
2) Make it more difficult for a Dunadan woman to conceive. You could tie this to the lifespan, so that each Dunadan woman would be likely to birth like 5 children during her lifespan, assuming nothing goes wrong and she starts early.
3) Make the Dunedain strictly monogamous, even if the partner dies. The books bear this out. Denethor didn't remarry once his wife died, even though he only had two sons. King Tarannon Falastur didn't remarry after exiling his queen, and died childless.

Assuming that the women would be technically fertile and marriageable from 20th birthday onwards (Finduilas, Boromir's mother, was 28 when he was born) to the start of aging, this would lead to (with 5 children born):
Numenor-born (1st characters): 140 fertile years = 1 child per 28 years.
Born before 1000 TA: 120 fertile years = 1 child per 24 years.
Born before 2000 TA: 100 fertile years = 1 child per 20 years.
Born before 2500 TA: 80 fertile years = 1 child per 16 years.
Born after 2500 TA: 60 fertile years = 1 child per 12 years.
Born after 2500 TA (mixed-blood): 40 fertile years = 1 child per 8 years.

Those are averages, of course. Again, Finduilas gave birth to Boromir and Faramir only 5 years apart. It can happen.

Taking into account 1), especially pre-1000 TA but maybe up to 2000 TA, the women would be less likely to marry straightaway, having so many years to look forward to. So that easily cuts 20 years from the fertile years right there.
Taking into account 3), is is quite easy to presume that the husband would be 20+ years older than the woman, and hence likely to die sooner. Since the widow wouldn't (normally) remarry, that might cut 20+ years from her remaining fertile years.

Thus, we would get a new table, looking more like this:
Numenor-born (1st characters): 140 fertile years - 40 years = 1 child per 20 years.
Born before 1000 TA: 120 fertile years - 40 years = 1 child per 16 years.
Born before 2000 TA: 100 fertile years - 40 years = 1 child per 12 years.
Born before 2500 TA: 80 fertile years - 20 years = 1 child per 12 years.
Born after 2500 TA: 60 fertile years - 20 years = 1 child per 8 years.
Born after 2500 TA (mixed-blood): 40 fertile years - 20 years = 1 child per 4 years.

Massaging those numbers a bit, we get:
Born before 1000 TA: Conceive on a 1d20 roll of 20 yearly.
Born before 2500 TA: Conceive on a 1d20 roll of 19-20 yearly.
Born after 2500 TA: Conceive on a 1d20 roll of 18-20 yearly.
Born after 2500 TA (mixed-blood): Conceive on a 1d20 roll of 15-20 yearly.

If conception & birth happens, skip the next year. (It is much rarer for a mother, especially a nursing one, to get pregnant straight away.)

Or, perhaps a bit more convenient if we are skipping decades:
Born before 1000 TA: Conceive on a 1d20 roll of 11+ per 10 years.
Born before 2500 TA: Conceive on a 1d20 roll of 11+ per 5 years.
Born after 2500 TA: Conceive on a 1d20 roll of 11+ per 3 years.
Born after 2500 TA (mixed-blood): Conceive on a 1d20 roll of 5+ per 3 years.

STATISTICS

Dunedain are great. So they will get nice bonuses from the start, and then diminish through the Third Age.

Numenor-born (1st characters): +4 SIZ, +4 STR, +4 CON, +4 APP
Born before 1000 TA: +3 SIZ, +3 STR, +3 CON, +3 APP
Born before 2000 TA: +3 SIZ, +2 STR, +2 CON, +2 APP
Born before 2500 TA: +3 SIZ, +2 STR, +1 CON, +1 APP
Born after 2500 TA: +2 SIZ, +1 STR, +1 CON, +1 APP
Born after 2500 TA (mixed-blood): +2 SIZ, +1 STR
The above numbers are for pure-blood Dunedain (save for the last). The mixed-blood Dunedain (common especially after Kin-strife) will skip down a row. Incidentally, that +2 SIZ, +1 STR is what I was going to give to the Rohirrim.

Admittedly, I do have an alternative idea to this, which is that instead of a bonus, it simply raises the maximum. Thus, rather than giving the Dunedain 12 extra stat points for free in the beginning of the Third Age, they'd have to spend the Yearly Trainings to 'grow to their full potential'. However, since everyone is a Dunedain, I am not sure if it is worth the effort. It is basically just scaling. I should make a couple of example characters just to see how they work out.

TRAITS

We'll probably go with the Pendragon Traits as is... Energetic is one that I might remove, since it has basically no real use, as the stamina is better, IMHO, modelled by Constitution. I'll need to see whether I will do any other changes. [EDIT: After some more consideration, I'll probably leave the traits as they are. Energetic/Lazy is a good NPC trait combo, even though I don't see Energetic getting rolled too often.]

I have been trying to put together the Religious traits for the Gondorians, but it is not quite that easy, as it is not spelled out in the books. Tolkien himself was a devout Catholic, but there is no medieval Catholic Church in Middle-Earth. Indeed, organized religion is absent as far as I can see. However, some traits are obviously valued more than others. The best example of a virtuous man that we have is Aragorn, I'd argue. It seems that the Traits worth looking at would be:
Chaste, Just, Merciful, Modest, Spiritual, Temperate and Valorous.
That is seven traits for the seven stars of the House of Elendil, which I find quite pleasing.

As for saying that it would be too hard to get them all to 16? Not necessarily. If you look at the Aging, the Dunedain have plenty of time to spend on their spiritual pursuits, too, should they so choose. With all seven starting at 13 (with Valorous probably starting at 15, and one of them at 16, as per Pendragon chargen rules), it would only take 16 points to raise them all to 16. In principle, a Dunadan character could achieve that around 40 from yearly training alone.

As for what would be the religious benefit of having all at 16+? How about this:

"Blessing of the Valar
Thanks to living an exemplary life, the Valar have blessed the character. He regains the vigor of his ancestors. His lifespan and statistics bonuses are equal to the Dunedain two steps earlier (so 40 more years in lifespan, and whatever the statistics bonuses is at that level). If he loses the Blessing and is over his 'normal' lifespan, he will start making yearly aging rolls, but does not suffer aging for the years already past. However, if he is Blessed, and reaches the higher aging threshold, he will voluntarily sleep away, accepting his fate like the early Kings of Numenor."

So for instance, a mixed-blood Dunadan born in 2980 TA, who becomes blessed, would have a lifespan of 100 years before aging rolls (instead of 60), and Statistics of +3 SIZ, +2 STR, +1 CON and +1 APP (basically, +1 to all except DEX).

I am also considering allowing two subsets, like:

"The Noble Warrior
Valorous, Just, Merciful, Modest and Temperate.
Gives +3 Hit Points and +5 to Valorous rolls."

"The Gentle Healer
Merciful, Modest, Temperate, Chaste and Spiritual.
Gives +5 bonus to First Aid and Chirurgery skills when they are rolled."

Someone who collects the whole set of seven would get all three benefits. Again, Aragorn is the poster child of this, although he might get a special bonus from being the rightful King, too.

PASSIONS

The normal Pendragon passions seem to work just fine the way they are. (Although I think we will keep our lowered bonuses, +5 for Success and +10 for Critical, as we found the official +10 and doubled (or +20) to skill to be a bit too overpowered.)

Honor
Hospitality
Love*
- (Family)
- (Spouse)
Loyalty*
- (Group)
- (Lord)
- (Vassals)
Hate*
- (X)
- (Y)
- (Z)

* = Only the highest value of the subcategories counts for Annual Glory... assuming that we'll even use it.

Furthermore, rather than starting out at 20, the Dunedain noblemen have some additional training, and are not considered to be ready until they are 30. In return for this extra training, they gain: Sindarin 10, Lore 10, Read 10, and 3 extra trait or passion points. (Lore is basically history and such, tales and legends. It replaces Faerie Lore.)
This helps to prevent the Dunedain from simply maxing their stats so easily.
Towards the end of the Third Age, the mixed-blood Dunedain neglect some of the old ways, and start the game at 25, with: Sindarin 6 and Read 10.

I'm not sure this is necessarily the right course. IIRC, the Dunedain didn't mature any slower, just lived longer. I'd go with the higher skills, without the extra trait/passion points.

Everything else looks excellent!!

SDLeary

I'm not sure this is necessarily the right course. IIRC, the Dunedain didn't mature any slower, just lived longer. I'd go with the higher skills, without the extra trait/passion points.


I agree that they mature at the same rate as normal humans, being fully grown around 20. However, that doesn't mean that they are ready to take over the family business just yet. Consider it a university education equivalent; a Dunadan Lord is much more sophisticated and educated than a medieval knight who cannot even Read. The extra trait/passion points are there to give the Dunedain a bit stronger personality (will) than regular humans, too.

And, admittedly, to make it easy and to eat up some of their Yearly Trainings rather than let them spam it all into statistics:
Lore 2 to 10 = 2 Yearly Trainings (2*4 skill points)
Read 0 to 10 = 2.5 Yearly Trainings (2.5*4 skill points)
Sindarin 0 to 10 = 2.5 Yearly Trainings (2.5*4 skill points)
3 trait/passion points = 3 Yearly Trainings

Total = 10 Yearly Trainings = 20 years to physical maturity + 10 years to 'full civic adulthood'.




Everything else looks excellent!!


Thanks! Especially for the comments; it helps to have someone questioning why I am doing something. :)

GLORY

I am a touch ambivalent about Glory, especially Annual (Passive) Glory, since in a campaign that skips forward a lot of time, the Annual Glory very easily swamps the Adventure Glory. And that I do not like. I am not yet decided on which would be the best alternative, so I will just list some of my musings and hope that people will chime in with their suggestions and comments.

Remember that the PCs will start with about £100 estates, which has an impact on the landholding, and that they very likely have something like 3-5 Traits & Passions at 16+ at the beginning, and likely a couple of more in a few years since the beginning.

1. No Annual Glory (not even for landholding)
- Pros: Easy both for chargen and the play, since it is utterly ignored. No need to balance it against Adventure Glory, since it doesn't exist.
- Cons: No benefit for being a lord for 100 years as compared to 1 year. No glory benefit from having high traits & passions for several years. No 'fame' & social respect for having been around for a century. (The last one I could cover adopting a Fame mechanic running alongside Glory, but that would add to the bookkeeping.)

2. Reduced Annual Glory: Only count the highest Trait & Passion
- Pros: Certainly brings the Annual Glory down. Relatively easy to manage in chargen and in game.
- Cons: While I would be willing to admit that the highest Trait would be likely the most talked about, it would make sense that someone with loads of high traits would get at least some more stuff said about him, than one who has just one. This still has the downside of the landholding glory (although that is easy to fix, see below).

3. Reduced Annual Glory: 5 Glory per Trait/Passion of 16+ (total capped at 50) and landholding 1 Glory per £10 (meaning about 10 Glory per year for the normal PC = 1000 Glory in 100 years, which is not going to do much) (total capped at 50, too).
- Pros: Gives benefit from multiple Traits and Passions, and some benefit from being a Lord, especially if they get some extra lands. However, even during a 100 year reign with maxed out Annual Glory, they would be unlikely to gain more than 6000 Glory (at the start, anyway), which is not THAT outrageous given that it is 100 years interacting with the society. Also, it gives some scope and benefit of managing to enlarge their holdings, rather than be capped right at the start.
- Cons: Requires some additional bookkeeping in chargen.

4. Full Annual Glory with 16+ Traits & Passions giving their value in Glory and landholding giving 1 Glory per £1 up to 100 Glory
- Pros: Works reasonably well in SHORT mini-campaigns.
- Cons: Totally swamps Adventure Glory, especially in longer mini-campaigns. 100 Landholding Glory is the default, and gaining another 100+ from Traits and Passions is not only conceivable, it is a nigh certainty just a few years into the game. So 200+ Glory per year, resulting in 20 000 Glory in 100 years. Which is a touch too much for my taste.


My current favorite is 3.
True, we need to eyeball the chargen Glory if the characters are much older than starting age, for instance if they happen to be 80 at the start, I am not going to run it year by year, but simply let them make their characters at 80 and then give them like 1/3rd of the trait+passion glory times the number of years since start. It should sort of balance out, since most of those Traits and Passions would be raised to 16+ preferentially towards the end than towards the start. In any case, I think it would be close enough.

Just to do a quick calculation on the 'typical' mini-campaign (not that I have one ready yet, but just to check how big of a deal this is):
- Duration: 50 years
- Adventures: 10 or so major adventures, about 500 Glory each (yes, I am bumping up the Adventure Glory), and 10 minor ones of about 100 each = 6000 Glory from Adventure
- Typical Annual Glory: About 40 Glory per year using system 3, about 200 per year using system 4 = 2000 Glory or 10000 Glory
- One-time Glory (Marriage, Title, Knighting): 500 + 500 + 1000 = 2000 Glory.

System 3: 10000 Glory, of which about 60% has been gained from Adventure.
System 4: 18000 Glory, of which about 33% has been gained from Adventure.

Whereas if we have a fast-paced mini-campaign of 25 years, then the Annual Glory would be halved and diminish its impact a bit more. Although, you would still have to take into account the Annual Glory in chargen, which could easily add another 20 years or so Annual Glory, which in the system 4 would add a whopping 4000 Glory to the total.

Any thoughts?

STATISTICS

Dunedain are great. So they will get nice bonuses from the start, and then diminish through the Third Age.

Numenor-born (1st characters): +4 SIZ, +4 STR, +4 CON, +4 APP
Born before 1000 TA: +3 SIZ, +3 STR, +3 CON, +3 APP
Born before 2000 TA: +3 SIZ, +2 STR, +2 CON, +2 APP
Born before 2500 TA: +3 SIZ, +2 STR, +1 CON, +1 APP
Born after 2500 TA: +2 SIZ, +1 STR, +1 CON, +1 APP
Born after 2500 TA (mixed-blood): +2 SIZ, +1 STR
The above numbers are for pure-blood Dunedain (save for the last). The mixed-blood Dunedain (common especially after Kin-strife) will skip down a row. Incidentally, that +2 SIZ, +1 STR is what I was going to give to the Rohirrim.

Admittedly, I do have an alternative idea to this, which is that instead of a bonus, it simply raises the maximum. Thus, rather than giving the Dunedain 12 extra stat points for free in the beginning of the Third Age, they'd have to spend the Yearly Trainings to 'grow to their full potential'. However, since everyone is a Dunedain, I am not sure if it is worth the effort. It is basically just scaling. I should make a couple of example characters just to see how they work out.


So, a quick back of the envelope calculation:
5 stats at 18 each is 90 points. We ignore the bonuses for now, since they increase the cap, too. Assuming that the characters start with 60 stat points, this leaves a gap of 30 points before they are maxed out in all stats. That is not a huge gap, when they may have up to 50 yearly trainings to spend (although more often they would have 10 - 30 yearly trainings), deducting the first 10 years that are already spoken for.

I might do this:
- All stats start from 10.
- You have 10 points to spend, but SIZ costs double (and cannot be raised after chargen). You can 'sell down' to 8, gaining equivalent amount in extra points.
- In addition, you have 4 'Yearly Trainings' to reflect the adolescence. These can be used for SIZ, too, but remember that it still costs double.
- Glory Bonus Points are an exception to the SIZ rule. You can raise SIZ with Glory Bonus Points 1 to 1 basis.

Thus, a SIZ maxed starting character might look like this:
SIZ 18, DEX 8, STR 10, CON 12, APP 8
Adding the first-gen Dunedain bonus:
SIZ 22, DEX 8, STR 14, CON 16, APP 12
Pretty fierce.

Making him as a 40-year old combat monster, we'd add 10 more years of yearly training: +3 STR, +5 to get the main weapon to 20, +3 to the secondary weapon (Lance).
SIZ 22, DEX 8, STR 17, CON 16, APP 12

Updating him to a 60-year old combat monster, we'd add 10 more (full) yearly trainings: +5 STR (maxed out), +3 CON, +2 to get the secondary weapon (Lance) to 20. We can also assume that he gets +1 STR from Glory.
SIZ 22, DEX 8, STR 22+1 from Glory, CON 19, APP 12
So, we'd be looking at 9d6, with Sword 20+ and Lance 20+ (some Glory to the highest skills), but who would be still a total novice (a couple of skills at 10) when it comes to courtly skills.

Lets push him on this combat monster path to 80-year old, with 10 more (full) yearly trainings: +3 CON (maxed out), +7 to DEX to improve that.
SIZ 22, DEX 15, STR 22+1 from Glory, CON 22, APP 12
Yeah, not a bad stat bar... However, what can this character do rather than excel in personal combat? Not much. I really don't expect that any of my players would adopt such a narrow focus, especially if I design the adventures to focus more on Skill & Trait use than solely hitting people on the head with a sharpened iron bar.

Of course, it is also a bit questionable to let him get 21 stat increases after he is technically already fully grown. Sure, you can pump iron, but your body still imposes some limits. Most Olympic class gymnasts are quite young.

So, with that in mind, I am starting to verge on this decision:

Your Statistics at 20-year old are your baseline. The maximum you can increase your Statistics to via Yearly Training is Starting Value+3, up to the cultural maximum. However, you can still use Yearly Training to recover from Major Wounds.

Given that one cannot increase SIZ after chargen, this would result in this kind of a maxed out build for our combat monster (at 40): +3 to DEX, STR and CON, +1 to main weapon
SIZ 22, DEX 11, STR 17+1 from Glory, CON 17, APP 12
7d6, 39 hp, and healing rate of 4. Still pretty respectable, but not able to arm-wrestle a troll.

This also grants a bit of a niche protection: if you are the sneaky DEX guy, then those big clumsy bruisers will not be able to match you in DEX even if they are a couple of decades older than you.

Any thoughts? Good idea, bad idea?


EDIT:
Just to try out a bit more balanced char sheet:
SIZ 20, DEX 8, STR 19, CON 15, APP 12
would result in:
SIZ 20+1 Glory, DEX 11, STR 22, CON 18, APP 12
Couple of more Glory Points (it is possible) and this guy could break 8d6 limit. Which is pretty respectable for a human. Interesting to note that under these rules, what you want to do is to start with STR max-3, so that you can raise it up to full, rather than maximize your SIZ at the start (because that costs double points). But it is not a huge effect. For instance, the difference between this build and the previous one is 2 points in total. Had I started out with 12+4 in STR in that case, it would be SIZ 23 + STR 19 = 42, vs. SIZ 21 + STR 22 = 43 in Damage calculation. That extra 2 SIZ also give better Knockdown statistic and hit points (although the latter is overtaken by the higher CON in second build). To me, that implies that the chargen now is reasonably robust when it comes to balancing SIZ with the other stats.

I think you need Glory, and Inglory! The Sum is your Renown. More Glory, looked upon positively. More Inglory, looked upon negatively. But it all adds up to you being better known.

Im not keen on regular Pendragon glory in ME. Really not keen on the whole manorial eonomy thing either for that matter. It doesn't seem to quite fit.

If you were to do it though, I'd go with 2 or 3.

SDLeary

I might do this:
- All stats start from 10.
- You have 10 points to spend, but SIZ costs double (and cannot be raised after chargen). You can 'sell down' to 8, gaining equivalent amount in extra points.
- In addition, you have 4 'Yearly Trainings' to reflect the adolescence. These can be used for SIZ, too, but remember that it still costs double.
- Glory Bonus Points are an exception to the SIZ rule. You can raise SIZ with Glory Bonus Points 1 to 1 basis.

I don't like buying SIZ outside of chargen. Now, something I can see if you are going to use the manorial rules is that during times of plenty, a successful Stewardship roll increases the characters SIZ. Conversely, during times of famine, the characters SIZ and STR go down by one if they fail their Stewarship roll.

And that character in your example is not just a combat monster, but he's a bit on the portly side too.

SDLeary

Thanks for you comments!


I don't like buying SIZ outside of chargen. Now, something I can see if you are going to use the manorial rules is that during times of plenty, a successful Stewardship roll increases the characters SIZ. Conversely, during times of famine, the characters SIZ and STR go down by one if they fail their Stewarship roll.

And that character in your example is not just a combat monster, but he's a bit on the portly side too.


I don't mind SIZ increase with Glory. Glory Bonus Points are literally able to make you 'larger than life'. The whole idea of Glory Bonus Points (IMHO) is to allow characters who are more 'heroic' than the ordinary characters. I don't like the houserule of attributing SIZ increase from Glory to the expansion of the waistline. If I were to allow SIZ increases from Yearly Training, then yes. But Glory Bonus Points are able to sidestep realism.

There is even an in-world example of characters growing after their youth: Merry and Pippin with ent draughts. Not the same as Glory Bonus Points, I grant you. :)


I think you need Glory, and Inglory! The Sum is your Renown. More Glory, looked upon positively. More Inglory, looked upon negatively. But it all adds up to you being better known.

Im not keen on regular Pendragon glory in ME. Really not keen on the whole manorial eonomy thing either for that matter. It doesn't seem to quite fit.

If you were to do it though, I'd go with 2 or 3.


Glory and Inglory
The characters are Gondorian nobles. As such, I don't expect there is much collection of Inglory. If someone does bad deeds, then I can slap him with a social penalty as the word of his deeds spreads, or, if it is heinous enough, he likely gets summoned to appear before the king and gets stripped of his rank and punished with death or exile... The character probably opts to flee to Umbar instead and join the Black Numenorians / Corsairs there.
Again, due to the context of the campaign, I think Glory works well enough. They are nobles, working with the royal court. They are public figures, their deeds would be noticed and sung about (if worthy). Now, if they were Rangers of the North, doing their work in secret, I think you would have more of a point. Even then, it would be just relabeling Glory to something like Prowess and just keep the mechanic more or less the same, just that the recognition bonus would only work amongst other Rangers & elves of Rivendell, who know about their deeds.

Manorial system
Gondor is a feudal society, some parts of it explicitly so. As such, I don't think that the manorial system is a bad approximation. The farmers are probably free farmers rather than serfs, I'd agree with you there. Also, the Gondorian army is somewhat heavier in armor (of the foot soldiers) and knights are rarer than in Pendragon, so the nobleman's retinue looks a bit different, too. In any case, as said earlier, we won't be following it in detail, and it mostly determines how many soldiers each family is able to bring to the field, which also measures their wealth and status in the pecking order (which is influenced by other things, too).
We'll most likely end up dealing with the landholding more in the abstract, like they will have a chance to influence the location of their ancestral estates, like if they are looking for a defensive position, rich farmlands, scenic forests, etc, each of which has some impact for the later. And then they can do long-term decisions: Are they spending their discretionary funds on fortifications, investments on the land to increase its productivity (very slow), larger retinues, hoarding it, or charitable works? And those choices would then have some impact in the following generations, rather than calculating each librum (or its equivalent in Gondorian money).

Thanks for you comments!

Manorial system
Gondor is a feudal society, some parts of it explicitly so. As such, I don't think that the manorial system is a bad approximation. The farmers are probably free farmers rather than serfs, I'd agree with you there. Also, the Gondorian army is somewhat heavier in armor (of the foot soldiers) and knights are rarer than in Pendragon, so the nobleman's retinue looks a bit different, too. In any case, as said earlier, we won't be following it in detail, and it mostly determines how many soldiers each family is able to bring to the field, which also measures their wealth and status in the pecking order (which is influenced by other things, too).
We'll most likely end up dealing with the landholding more in the abstract, like they will have a chance to influence the location of their ancestral estates, like if they are looking for a defensive position, rich farmlands, scenic forests, etc, each of which has some impact for the later. And then they can do long-term decisions: Are they spending their discretionary funds on fortifications, investments on the land to increase its productivity (very slow), larger retinues, hoarding it, or charitable works? And those choices would then have some impact in the following generations, rather than calculating each librum (or its equivalent in Gondorian money).

Oh, yes. I completely understand! I just don't like the Manorial economy in the game! :D

SDLeary

Oh, yes. I completely understand! I just don't like the Manorial economy in the game! :D


Having done a bit more research, I have to backpedal a bit about Gondor being explicitly a feudal society. It can certainly be imagined as such (as I did when reading the books with all the lords, princes and knights), but Tolkien is not explicit about it. In any case, in our campaign, it will be feudal, although like said, with fewer rungs in the middle (Lords will be direct vassals of the King, with the exception of those who are vassals of the Prince of Belfalas, which none of the players will be).

As for the Manorial economy, I think I misunderstood you, when you said that it doesn't quite fit. I assumed you meant that it didn't fit Middle-Earth/Gondor, while your objection seems to be more generic. Since that would take us off-topic from the Middle-Earth and has less to do with the campaign I am planning (since we wouldn't be using the manorial economy in detail anyway), I suggest that we continue that discussion, if you feel like it, via messages or in one of the manorial threads. :)

Morien, I just want to say that I'm following this thread with great interest. My group has been discussing running a Middle Earth campaign, and there's been a fair bit of discussion about which system to use. The proposal to use KAP has support but, to this point, no one's stepped up to start the conversion work necessary. All that to say that I'll try to offer up some feedback in the forum in the coming weeks. Thanks for this!

Morien, I just want to say that I'm following this thread with great interest. My group has been discussing running a Middle Earth campaign, and there's been a fair bit of discussion about which system to use. The proposal to use KAP has support but, to this point, no one's stepped up to start the conversion work necessary. All that to say that I'll try to offer up some feedback in the forum in the coming weeks. Thanks for this!

Than you for taking the time to read this and write back!

I have to say that I really like KAP for Middle-Earth, much more so than any other system (with the possible exception of GURPS, which brings with it its own baggage). I have GMed a couple of convention games set in Middle-Earth using KAP, the latter one being a mini-campaign of Riders of Rohan, gearing up to the War of the Ring. Starting from when they are just youths herding horses, becoming part of Eomer's own eored and hunting down some orcs near the Fangorn Forest, and then fighting at Hornburg and Pellenor Fields. KAP is great for convention games, since it is so easy to pick up.

My view is that if you are playing towards the end of the Third Age (or simply with common men), then KAP works almost perfectly as is. The only issue is if you are looking to have lightly armored or unarmored 'adventurers' rather than soldiers in mail, then KAP can be pretty deadly. Even then, if the basic opponent is a small orc with 3d6 damage, a padded armor (4) and a shield (6) will work wonders more often than not, without any extra rules to keep the fatality rate down. Just go easy on the trolls!

The reason why I am having some issues wit the conversion is because I want to start from the Second Age, with all of those long-lived Dunedain as player characters. Those long lifespans really screw up the KAP progression, which is not intended to handle 100+ years of attribute boosting yearly trainings!

Even though it's setting isn't quite what you're looking for, I do suggest taking a look at The One Ring RPG; the systems are similar enough you could probably do a blend of them quite easily to bring in KAP Traits (they have traits in that too, but they're different), and like the random tables and whatnot. Right now, the only things it doesn't have that you'd want is Gondorian stats (though you could probably make do with Rangers of the North, Bardings, Men of the Lake, and Riders of Rohan). The way it's set up, it takes a lot of cues from KAP; the adventure structure (Adventuring Phase in the Spring/Summer, Fellowship Phase in the Winter), a generational aspect, etc. And obviously, the timelines don't match, but that's going to be an issue no matter what you do. I at least think you might want to steal their mechanics for Hope and Shadow, though this is where it breaks away the most from KAP, so I dunno how you'd actually DO it, but it adds a lot of Tolkienesq flavor

Even though it's setting isn't quite what you're looking for, I do suggest taking a look at The One Ring RPG; the systems are similar enough you could probably do a blend of them quite easily to bring in KAP Traits (they have traits in that too, but they're different), and like the random tables and whatnot. Right now, the only things it doesn't have that you'd want is Gondorian stats (though you could probably make do with Rangers of the North, Bardings, Men of the Lake, and Riders of Rohan). The way it's set up, it takes a lot of cues from KAP; the adventure structure (Adventuring Phase in the Spring/Summer, Fellowship Phase in the Winter), a generational aspect, etc. And obviously, the timelines don't match, but that's going to be an issue no matter what you do. I at least think you might want to steal their mechanics for Hope and Shadow, though this is where it breaks away the most from KAP, so I dunno how you'd actually DO it, but it adds a lot of Tolkienesq flavor

dwarinpt suggested it in the other thread, and my answer is there:
http://nocturnalmediaforum.com/iecarus/forum/showthread.php?2294-Lord-of-the-Rings-Conversion&p=23836&viewfull=1#post23836

I am happy to continue the discussion there (such as what do you and dwarinpt feel that One Ring would bring to the table that would make it worth while for someone to switch over from KAP; you mention Hope and Shadow, for instance), but in this thread, I would like to concentrate on how to modify KAP in particular for the campaign I have envisioned. :)
(Although I admit that I was starting to go a bit off-topic myself with my previous answer to Attila.)

dwarinpt suggested it in the other thread, and my answer is there:
http://nocturnalmediaforum.com/iecarus/forum/showthread.php?2294-Lord-of-the-Rings-Conversion&p=23836&viewfull=1#post23836

I am happy to continue the discussion there (such as what do you and dwarinpt feel that One Ring would bring to the table that would make it worth while for someone to switch over from KAP; you mention Hope and Shadow, for instance), but in this thread, I would like to concentrate on how to modify KAP in particular for the campaign I have envisioned. :)
(Although I admit that I was starting to go a bit off-topic myself with my previous answer to Attila.)

Morien, I had no intention of hijacking your thread, so my apologies. I did say that KAP was only one of several systems being considered: The One Ring, Reign and Adventures in Middle Earth (i.e. D&D 5e) being the others. Those who advocate for KAP want to incorporate the aspect of family legacies into a long-running adventure campaign. Those who are opposed are concerned that the 'Stewardship' aspect of KAP will overwhelm the adventuring. We saw that happen in our last KAP campaign, where the players became very politically immersed in expanding their family holdings after the death of King Uther (none of them want to go to feasts anymore). Who their heirs married, winning the Countess' favour and backing the right Duke (not to mention keeping the Saxons from making off with their sheep) became their predominant concern.

All that to say that I'm very interested in how to go about adding the elements of the ME world into the KAP system. I agree that that is probably the focus in this thread.

Those who advocate for KAP want to incorporate the aspect of family legacies into a long-running adventure campaign. Those who are opposed are concerned that the 'Stewardship' aspect of KAP will overwhelm the adventuring.

IMHO, that is not a system-choice (although KAP supports it way better than something like D&D 5e), but a campaign-choice. The reason why politics play such a major role in Anarchy in GPC is tha tthe players finally get to be the movers and shakers in Salisbury, with no greater overall power tying everything together. If that is a problem for (some of) the players, then it is clear that the campaign focus is misaligned (at least for those players), and the focus should be more on knightly adventuring or whatever they are enjoying. Of course, I'd also point out that all the examples you mentioned would work just fine as adventure hooks, too.

Anyway, if you wish to have a discussion about GPC in Anarchy or Middle-Earth in general, I'd be happier having those discussions in their own respective threads, rather than in this one. :)

Alright, back to the hammering out some houserules for a Middle-Earth campaign using KAP... Lets talk about...

SKILLS

Many of the skills will translate just fine from KAP to Middle-Earth. Some are a bit more out of place.

Skills that I'd simply drop:
Falconry: Too narrow and focused on a very specific hunting style.
Gaming: Never really found a good use for this skill. Again, it seems overly specific, and not very usable outside of a narrow set of circumstances.
Tourney: I don't recall any tournaments in Middle-Earth. Not saying there couldn't be any, but even if there were, the rules shouldn't be THAT difficult. Tourney was always a rather problematic, niche skill for me, so this is a good opportunity to drop it and see if anyone will miss it.
Religion: Religion, while part of Middle-Earth, doesn't pay that huge a role. Sure, there are Valar and Maiar, and you could claim that they act like Archangels & Saints more or less. But it is not as if you can pray to a Maiar and have a miracle happen. Nor is there hundreds of years of stories of saints that you might learn. No, there is simply not enough meat in this skill, when it comes to Middle-Earth to justify it as a separate skill. (But see Old Lore, below.)
Romance: Courtly Amor doesn't really appear in Tolkien, either. People don't engage in emotional blackmail and manipulation as part of some elaborate game with its own, acknowledged rules. People can still be emotionally abusive or demand quests from suitors (now for that we do have a couple of fine examples, Thingol & Elrond) or engage in extramarital affairs, but it is on them, not part of some accepted court culture. Off it goes.


I'd also meld some skills together... Actually, it might be easier for me to just write a new skill list that I have in mind (new skills bolded), along with some houserules I was thinking of implementing:

Animal Lore: Get along with animals, take care of them and know stuff about them. (Note: Horses are part of Horsemanship, too; use the higher of the two. Hunting includes information about the common hunted animals, but not for squirrels and such.)
Awareness
Battle: I might cap Naval Battles with Boating skill, though, if the PCs are commanding their own fleet/ship.
Boating: I'd say this covers bigger ships as well, to make it a bit more useful.
Carousing: Northman-style! Includes some drinking songs, too.
Chirurgery
Compose
Courtesy
Dancing
First Aid
Flirting
Herb Lore: Knowledge of herbs, especially healing ones, and how to use them. Yes, I know an argument could be made that this should be under Chirurgery. I am still thinking about it.
Horsemanship
Hunting: Seriously considering splitting this up to Hunting (actually hunting/tracking an animal) and Woodcraft (or some such, which would be the orienteering, constructing shelters, and stuff like that). Currently, Hunting is one of those MUST-HAVE skills.
Industry: Since I don't expect 'crafting' to be a main concern for the PCs, I am happy enough to leave this as a single skill. I might combine it with other skills, like Hunting + Industry (roll the lower) = tanning hides, or Bow + Industry = fletching arrows. I think that would work just fine.
Intrigue
Language: Adunaic evolving to Westron (native, as time passes), Sindarin, Northman languages (Rhovanionish evolving to Rohirric & Dalish), Dunlending (a dialect spoken in the valleys and slopes of Ered Nimrais, in Gondor), Haradaic dialects, Easterling dialects. The Language skill+5 caps the performance & influence skills (so language 10 means that your cap is 15), until you have it at 16+, at which point the cap disappears; you are as fluent as a native. Language skill also brings with it familiarity of the culture that speaks the language. (I was thinking of having a separate Culture skill, but decided that was too much. See Noble Lore, though.)
Old Lore: Mainly history & stories. You'd use Old Lore to identify an old crest, if the family is no longer in existence, for example.
Orate
Noble Lore [kingdom]: Replaces Heraldry & Recognize. This is the sum of your knowledge of the nobles of the kingdom, their lands, crests, family connections, etc. Modifiers apply based on the depth of the information, the status of the family and the distance to your own stomping grounds. You'd have some idea of the allied kingdoms, but probably only the few main nobles, and the enemy king's name. For example, you'd need a different skill to really know the internal pecking order of the Corsairs of Umbar, and that knowledge might not be easily won.
Play
Read: Tengwar (Gondorian Westron & Sindarin), Cirth (Dwarfish & Northman languages). There might be other alphabets, too, but the PCs would be unlikely to learn them.
Singing
Sleight of Hand: Pickpocketing and other nimble-fingered tricks. Again, not very common for most of the PCs, but I am expecting some commoners, too, in the campaign, who might be interested.
Stealth: Starts from DEX/2 and defaults to it. Moving around quietly, also hiding. Very important later for Ithilien rangers.
Stewardship: Includes knowledge of administration and laws, too.
Swimming: Starts from DEX and defaults to it. This skill might see a bit more use than in a regular Pendragon, or it might not. The high default reflects the fact that Gondorians live near plenty of rivers and the sea, so it makes sense for them to know how to swim at a basic level.
Weapon: Weapon skills start at 10, part of the basic training of a (warrior) nobleman. A (non-warrior) noblewoman starts with 5, but gains 5 extra skill points to spend, in addition to higher starting skills in many non-combat skills.

Comments, suggestions, critique is welcome! Especially if you think I missed something important! Some of these were off the top of my head, so it is possible that I have overlooked something, or chopped a skill too fine.

Some comments:
Carousing: Interesting skill. Maybe link it to CON as you did with stealth. You could have it start at CON/2.
Herb lore and Chirurgery: I always assumed herbs were a part of the healing proces. But herb lore could entail more (like brewing potions or ointments) that assist in healing. and of course it will have other uses like brewing poisons.
Hunting: I like the idea of splitting the two. You could split it even further between hunting (catching game), geography (making your way through the country, knowing where north is. This could also include knowledge of where the twons and cities are) and woodcraft or survival (able to find shelter and such)
Old lore: If the knowledge of the Valar and such are in here I would drop religion as well.
Sleight of hand could be a noble's trick.

Some comments:
Carousing: Interesting skill. Maybe link it to CON as you did with stealth. You could have it start at CON/2.

Good idea. Carousing is more than just drinking, but having a higher tolerance for alcohol would help. Carousing is not only for the Northmen, but also for many of the commoners. So if you need to hire/find a ship, you could do worse than head to a harbor tavern and start ordering drinks. Kinda like socialising with the common sort, rather than the more formal feasts that the nobility would be up to.



Herb lore and Chirurgery: I always assumed herbs were a part of the healing proces. But herb lore could entail more (like brewing potions or ointments) that assist in healing. and of course it will have other uses like brewing poisons.

Yes, it was intended to be a bit more than what is included to Chirurgery. I think I might split it so that while the common healing herbs are part of Chirurgery (or rather, it is more like honey and moldy bread sort of thing), the more medicinal, internal uses would be Herb Lore. So helping against fevers and such, or like you said, poisons or detecting and countering them. This might narrow Chirurgery a bit to more taking care of someone who is wounded... I may have to examine the dividing line and decide where I want to end up. Of the top of my head, I might do this:

Chirurgery: Taking care of the wounded, tending wounds, minor herb knowledge like willowbark for pain and honey for the wounds to keep infection away.
Herb Lore: More expansive knowledge of the herbs. Detecting (or preparing) poisons and their effects. What will help to purge the patient if he has been poisoned. Herbs to help with various illnesses and ailments.

So normally, you can be a healer with just First Aid and Chirurgery and do fine, but Herb Lore takes it a notch further into Medicine territory.



Hunting: I like the idea of splitting the two. You could split it even further between hunting (catching game), geography (making your way through the country, knowing where north is. This could also include knowledge of where the twons and cities are) and woodcraft or survival (able to find shelter and such)


Hmm. Maybe Area Lore (to stick to the 'Lore' label) per kingdom/region again, with modifiers to more details you want or the farther you go. Maybe I will go with Region. So Area Lore [Ithilien] you know most of the paths and villages in Ithilien, you have a pretty good idea of the towns and roads in the rest of Gondor, but when it comes to Arnor, you know you should follow the Greenway to Tharbad and then if you continue up it, you will end up in Fornost Erain, unless you turn west to the Grey Havens or East to Rivendell. But that is pretty much it for Arnor. Of course, if you have already made that trip, you'd likely add the inns and towns along the Greenway to your 'familiarity' list.



Old lore: If the knowledge of the Valar and such are in here I would drop religion as well.


Well, I think everyone would know Eru and the Valar. But when it comes to the Maiar, it would be Old Lore, yes (with the exceptions of Osse, Uinen and Eonwe, who would also be famous enough to last in common memory), or what actually happened in Beleriand, and what was Vinyalonde.

Heh, I can see my players labelling this: "Ask the GM to explain his MacGuffin." -skill. :P



Sleight of hand could be a noble's trick.

Juggling and coin tricks, sure. Pickpocketing, not so much. At least, not in polite company. :)

I was thinking of making Industry + Sleight of Hand = Locksmith (Lockpicking).

EDIT: And to add, something like Underworld, or some such. No, not the dwarves, but the knowledge of the criminal organisations. This is naturally limited to those who would conceivably have such information (i.e. being thieves/smugglers themselves).

Alright, back to the hammering out some houserules for a Middle-Earth campaign using KAP... Lets talk about...

I'd recommend changing some of the labels so that they're more consistent with Tolkien's style. He was big on words, as I recall.


Falconry: Too narrow and focused on a very specific hunting style.

No loss. Curiously, Tolkien never really mentions falconry or hawking — perhaps it just never evolved as a sport in Middle-earth.


Gaming: Never really found a good use for this skill. Again, it seems overly specific, and not very usable outside of a narrow set of circumstances.

On the other hand, there are many references to gaming in Tolkien's works — "throws," "pawns," "blind-man's bluff," and, of course, the Riddle Game all exist in the Middle-earth. I'd keep it. Also gambling might be useful for down-on-their-luck rogues.


Tourney: I don't recall any tournaments in Middle-Earth. Not saying there couldn't be any, but even if there were, the rules shouldn't be THAT difficult. Tourney was always a rather problematic, niche skill for me, so this is a good opportunity to drop it and see if anyone will miss it.

No tourneys in Middle-earth that I can find reference to. Drop it.


Religion: Religion, while part of Middle-Earth, doesn't pay that huge a role. Sure, there are Valar and Maiar, and you could claim that they act like Archangels & Saints more or less. But it is not as if you can pray to a Maiar and have a miracle happen. Nor is there hundreds of years of stories of saints that you might learn. No, there is simply not enough meat in this skill, when it comes to Middle-Earth to justify it as a separate skill. (But see Old Lore, below.)

Agreed. There is no "church" or organized religion in Middle-earth.


Romance: Courtly Amor doesn't really appear in Tolkien, either. People don't engage in emotional blackmail and manipulation as part of some elaborate game with its own, acknowledged rules. People can still be emotionally abusive or demand quests from suitors (now for that we do have a couple of fine examples, Thingol & Elrond) or engage in extramarital affairs, but it is on them, not part of some accepted court culture. Off it goes.

Agreed.


Animal Lore: Get along with animals, take care of them and know stuff about them. (Note: Horses are part of Horsemanship, too; use the higher of the two. Hunting includes information about the common hunted animals, but not for squirrels and such.)

Works for me.


Awareness

Sure.


Battle: I might cap Naval Battles with Boating skill, though, if the PCs are commanding their own fleet/ship.

Okay.


Boating: I'd say this covers bigger ships as well, to make it a bit more useful.

"Sailing" would be a more Tolkienesque label.


Carousing: Northman-style! Includes some drinking songs, too.

I could see having some Carousing rules, but a skill?


Chirurgery

I'd relabel this "Herb Lore," or "Physic," personally. "Chirurgery" is damned hard to pronounce and people constantly trip over the word. More on this later.


Compose

Yes. Although, maybe not needed if part of a Craft specialization (see below).


Courtesy

Yes.


Dancing

Okay.


First Aid

"Healing," please. "First Aid" is so anachronistic. So is "Surgery" but that's much harder to find an archaic word for (or at least a pronounceable one).


Flirting

Sure.


Herb Lore: Knowledge of herbs, especially healing ones, and how to use them. Yes, I know an argument could be made that this should be under Chirurgery. I am still thinking about it.

KAP 5.1 says Chirurgery " ...includes...herbal medicine and bone setting." Boom. Just rename it "Herb Lore" and be done with it.


Horsemanship

Definitely.


Hunting: Seriously considering splitting this up to Hunting (actually hunting/tracking an animal) and Woodcraft (or some such, which would be the orienteering, constructing shelters, and stuff like that). Currently, Hunting is one of those MUST-HAVE skills.

I definitely would have a different skill for Woodcraft. Should include survival, orienteering, weather-sense. Could even wrap Hunting into it.


Industry: Since I don't expect 'crafting' to be a main concern for the PCs, I am happy enough to leave this as a single skill. I might combine it with other skills, like Hunting + Industry (roll the lower) = tanning hides, or Bow + Industry = fletching arrows. I think that would work just fine.

Rename it "Craft (Speciality)," where the Speciality is Jewels, Gold, Silver, Iron, Steel, Stone, Armor, Weapons, Swords, Cooking, etc. Important skill for elves, dwarves, and hobbits! Should include the ability to appraise value of other's work in the speciality.


Intrigue

Yes.


Language: Adunaic evolving to Westron (native, as time passes), Sindarin, Northman languages (Rhovanionish evolving to Rohirric & Dalish), Dunlending (a dialect spoken in the valleys and slopes of Ered Nimrais, in Gondor), Haradaic dialects, Easterling dialects. The Language skill+5 caps the performance & influence skills (so language 10 means that your cap is 15), until you have it at 16+, at which point the cap disappears; you are as fluent as a native. Language skill also brings with it familiarity of the culture that speaks the language. (I was thinking of having a separate Culture skill, but decided that was too much. See Noble Lore, though.)

Okay.


Old Lore: Mainly history & stories. You'd use Old Lore to identify an old crest, if the family is no longer in existence, for example.

Why not just "Lore"? Or better yet "Lore (Specialty)," where "Speciality" is History, Runes, Elves, Kingdom, Read Language, Magic, The Enemy, etc.


Orate

Sure.


Noble Lore [kingdom]: Replaces Heraldry & Recognize. This is the sum of your knowledge of the nobles of the kingdom, their lands, crests, family connections, etc. Modifiers apply based on the depth of the information, the status of the family and the distance to your own stomping grounds. You'd have some idea of the allied kingdoms, but probably only the few main nobles, and the enemy king's name. For example, you'd need a different skill to really know the internal pecking order of the Corsairs of Umbar, and that knowledge might not be easily won.

Not needed if you have one Lore with different specializations.


Play

I'd make this "Perform (Specialty)," where "Specialty" is an instrument, or singing, or storytelling, etc.


Read: Tengwar (Gondorian Westron & Sindarin), Cirth (Dwarfish & Northman languages). There might be other alphabets, too, but the PCs would be unlikely to learn them.
Not needed if you have one Lore skill with specializations.


Singing

Not needed if you have one Perform skill with specializations.


Sleight of Hand: Pickpocketing and other nimble-fingered tricks. Again, not very common for most of the PCs, but I am expecting some commoners, too, in the campaign, who might be interested.

I'd call this Legerdemain. Includes picking pockets, prestidigitation, opening locks, etc.


Stealth: Starts from DEX/2 and defaults to it. Moving around quietly, also hiding. Very important later for Ithilien rangers.

Okay.


Stewardship: Includes knowledge of administration and laws, too.

Yep.


Swimming: Starts from DEX and defaults to it. This skill might see a bit more use than in a regular Pendragon, or it might not. The high default reflects the fact that Gondorians live near plenty of rivers and the sea, so it makes sense for them to know how to swim at a basic level.

I'd default to Dex/2. Swimming was not that common a skill even in medieval England, I've learned, where everyone lived close to the sea or a river.


Weapon: Weapon skills start at 10, part of the basic training of a (warrior) nobleman. A (non-warrior) noblewoman starts with 5, but gains 5 extra skill points to spend, in addition to higher starting skills in many non-combat skills.

I like it, but I'd also allow for Bows, Thrown Weapons and Unarmed Combat. Actually, I might just have a "Fighting" skill default to 10 and 5, as you say, but allow people to develop individual weapon skills from there. Bows should always be their own discipline though — the Fighting skill would not translate.


Comments, suggestions, critique is welcome! Especially if you think I missed something important! Some of these were off the top of my head, so it is possible that I have overlooked something, or chopped a skill too fine.

Other skills for consideration:

Athletics: Skill that combines Jumping, Climbing, Running, etc.

Intimidation: Cowing your opponenent through your awesomeness.

Hello Morien and others.

If I might suggest...

Hunting: The hunting and catching/killing of game. Also used when tracking.

Woodcraft: Skills for surviving in the wilds. Direction sense (which way is North/West/etc), tracking (at 2/3 skill level, rounding fractions up), fire starting outside of home/hearth, shelter building, knowledge of "which way is best to go".

NOTE: Woodcraft and Hunting are not the same thing. I've known people who hunt who cannot find north or start an outside fire, and I've known people who are very skilled at woodcraft who cannot track.

=== === ===

Chirurgery: Healing the sick and wounded. Includes COMMON herbs used for healing. Would not include Athelas.

Herb Lore: the knowledge of how to actually *use* Athelas (Kingsfoil). Making herbal salves to aid in healing (an example: Make a salve of Athelas is Difficulty is 25. +1 to healing for every 5 points OVER 25 achieved in the roll. So, if you roll 25-29, you get +1, but if you roll 30-34 you get +2, etc). Knowledge of how to brew healing tonics. Knowledge of how to make poisons, but at 1/2 skill level.

Thanks to Cornelius, Taliesin and SirUkpyr for their comments. :)


I'd recommend changing some of the labels so that they're more consistent with Tolkien's style. He was big on words, as I recall.

Much bigger than we are, admittedly. :P



On the other hand, there are many references to gaming in Tolkien's works — "throws," "pawns," "blind-man's bluff," and, of course, the Riddle Game all exist in the Middle-earth. I'd keep it. Also gambling might be useful for down-on-their-luck rogues.


I am not claiming that games do not exist in Middle-Earth, but having them as their own skill? That seems a bit too narrow for me. As for the rogues, they can use Sleight of Hand to cheat if they want. Otherwise, I am happy to keep it as a game of chance, or in the case of something like chess, Battle.



"Sailing" would be a more Tolkienesque label.


I was trying to keep the changes to a minimum, but sure. I was actually thinking of making it Seamanship and calling it a day.



I could see having some Carousing rules, but a skill?


I see it more as Courtesy (commoners). Just that the Northmen are still rough and ready, not as civilized as the Gondorian nobility, so their feasts would resemble a frat party more than a civilized dinner party.



I'd relabel this "Herb Lore," or "Physic," personally. "Chirurgery" is damned hard to pronounce and people constantly trip over the word. More on this later.
[later] KAP 5.1 says Chirurgery " ...includes...herbal medicine and bone setting." Boom. Just rename it "Herb Lore" and be done with it.


True on the pronunciation, but all the players are by now KAP veterans. They know what Chirurgery is.
Like said, I was debating whether to have Herb Lore as its own skill or not, but I think I will keep it. Unlike in KAP, the player characters cover a wider range (and have heck of a lot more years to develop their skills) that I am happy to add some skills that allow them to push a bit further in their chosen "professions" (like the addition of Stealth, Sleight of Hand and Underworld for rogues). I feel there is enough of a niche for it when it comes to poisons and potions that it will be a worthwhile addition, rather than expand Chirurgery's importance even more.



"Healing," please. "First Aid" is so anachronistic. So is "Surgery" but that's much harder to find an archaic word for (or at least a pronounceable one).


It might be anachronistic, but it communicates its function (first aid binding of wounds after the battle) better than Healing. Healing is so broad a term that it would to me imply that it covers Chirurgery's & Herb Lore's role, too.



I definitely would have a different skill for Woodcraft. Should include survival, orienteering, weather-sense. Could even wrap Hunting into it.


I admit that I like Cornelius' idea of having a geographical skill, too. So I might adopt something like:
Lore (Area): Knowledge of the paths and locations within a specific area. The smaller the area you specialize in, the better you know it.
Hunting: Tracking, knowledge of hunted animals.
Woodcraft: Orienteering, knowledge of edible plants, starting fires with sticks, constructing crude shelters, weather-sense (also included to Seamanship, when at sea)



Rename it "Craft (Speciality)," where the Speciality is Jewels, Gold, Silver, Iron, Steel, Stone, Armor, Weapons, Swords, Cooking, etc. Important skill for elves, dwarves, and hobbits! Should include the ability to appraise value of other's work in the speciality.


Yet none of the player characters will be elves, dwarves or hobbitses, and noblemen rather than craftsmen (mostly, at least). :) Still, I see your point. I might adopt something like:
Craft (Metal): blacksmithing (tools, weapons and armor), whitesmithing (precious metals, jewelry)...
Craft (Stone): sculpting but also engraving (into stone), mining, masonry...
Craft (Wood): fletching, carpentry, also bone-carving...
Craft (Leather): skinning (also part of Hunting), tanning, etc...
Craft (Cloth): tailoring, embroidery, tapestries... Close to the old Industry skill for ladies in Pendragon.
These five should provide enough variety without being too specific, which I feel your Craft(Gold) would be.

Craft (Cooking) is also a bit too specific for me, and would feel like wasted points. If necessary, Indulgent can be pressed to be the 'skill' of a connoisseur of food and wine.



Why not just "Lore"? Or better yet "Lore (Specialty)," where "Speciality" is History, Runes, Elves, Kingdom, Read Language, Magic, The Enemy, etc.


Because I had Animal Lore, Herb Lore and Noble Lore. Old Lore fit that naming system.

Also, I don't want to make Lore skills TOO specialized. I am already skirting at the edge of it by making them kingdom or region specific (Area, Noble).



I'd make this "Perform (Specialty)," where "Specialty" is an instrument, or singing, or storytelling, etc.


A possible change.



Not needed if you have one Lore skill with specializations.


True, but it might be easier to have Read as its own skill, rather than buried under the Lore umbrella.



I'd call this Legerdemain. Includes picking pockets, prestidigitation, opening locks, etc.


Too French! :P Point being, all the players know what Sleight of Hand means, while legerdemain is totally new to them. I'd rather stick with the more English expression, thanks. :)



I'd default to Dex/2. Swimming was not that common a skill even in medieval England, I've learned, where everyone lived close to the sea or a river.


True, but there is another point, which is that no player in the history of Pendragon that I have GMed has ever put points to Swimming. By defaulting it to DEX, I can at least introduce a swimming challenge once in a while, whereas DEX/2 means I will have plenty of churlish, wet, unsuccessful PCs. Which tends to translate to frustrated players.



I like it, but I'd also allow for Bows, Thrown Weapons and Unarmed Combat. Actually, I might just have a "Fighting" skill default to 10 and 5, as you say, but allow people to develop individual weapon skills from there. Bows should always be their own discipline though — the Fighting skill would not translate.


Weapon skills = all weapons, bows & thrown weapons included. I see I was a bit unclear. Each weapon is still its own skill for us. Just that they all start from 10 for noblemen (warriors), due to being trained their whole lives to use weapons. The default of 10 represents more the generalized competence and 'combat sense' that translates between the weapons. But as I have discussed in the weapon defaults threads (which I don't wish to restart here, mind you), I prefer not giving defaults for high weapon skills since that encourages specialization and I wish to give a generalist a chance, too.

Unarmed combat (punches and kicks) I might default from DEX, actually, while Unarmed combat (wrestling) would default from STR. I think that is fair enough.



Other skills for consideration:

Athletics: Skill that combines Jumping, Climbing, Running, etc.


I'll just have that under DEX and Move. Long-distance running will bring CON into play, too.



Intimidation: Cowing your opponenent through your awesomeness.

I was seriously considering adding Intimidation into the skill list, but then I decided not to. I prefer this to be roleplayed. If you are Lord Heruvor, the Blade of Anduin and the Slayer of Trolls, then you WILL intimidate a pack a ruffians if they have heard of your deeds. if you are Sir Nobody of Whocares, then you might still intimidate some drunks due to your sword and armor, but why would you intimidate other soldiers? You don't have the reputation for it. Just looking big and menacing might work in some situations, but that is more of a function of your SIZ and STR, rather than your skill in Intimidation.

Of the top of my head, the most telling cases of 'Intimidation' were the Beater and the Biter in the Hobbit (book), not their wielders themselves, and certainly not any repartee from Thorin and Gandalf. Sure, I think Merry pulled off some surrender by intimidation at the Scouring of the Shire, but even there, it was more the fact that he had his own army of hobbits ready to kill the louts if they did not surrender. Had Merry stood there alone, things would have gone very differently. When a bigger group arrived, they didn't surrender, despite being outnumbered and ambushed by the hobbits, too.

Some ideas on using specialties:
You could use this that in that specialty the character knows what he is doing, but that the skill also gives some general ideas. for example: Craft(Metal) means you are a blacksmith and know how to work metal, but you also know something of crafting in general. So if you want to create something of wood or leather you can do it, but probably with a penalty. the penatly depends on the difference between the specialty you are testing for and the actual specialty you have.
In the case of geography (Ithilien) this would mean: you know your way around Ithilien, but in Dunland or Arnor you know the bigger cities, but not every village or thorp.

Another way:
You have a basic Craft skill, but if you wish to improve you need to specialize. So you begin with a Craft, but as you increase it you must choose a specialty, like metal or wood. You could also use this method for the weapons.

As for intimidation:
Using intimidation has an extreme number of situational modifiers that determine the final outcome (sizes of the groups involved, use of weapons, fear causing critters on one side or the other, killing of their leader in one stroke, wearing certain clothes or masks or painted faces. I also think that it can be used using other skills or traits. Although Size, Hate and maybe Cruel seem to be the most obvious, but others can also be used. A reckless attack against odds can be intimidating.

Unarmed combat:
KAP has some rules for brawling (Uses STR or DEX or Grapple) or grappling.

Just to consolidate the Lore -skills as I see them:

Lore
- Ancient: Sounds a bit better to my ear than Old or History.
- Animal: knowledge of animals and getting along with them. (Horses are under Horsemanship, too.)
- Area [kingdom]: mainly geographical knowledge, but I could expand this to include commoners. So if you have Lore: Area [Bree], you would be on first name basis with Barliman Butterbur of the Prancing Pony (in 3000s TA, that is), and he'd be happy to take messages from/to you, etc. On the other hand, that might be chopping things a bit too fine. I might instead make this kingdom wide again, and give bonuses for the PCs' local region.
- Herb: medicine, poison, cures. Commonly used healing herbs would be under Chirurgery, too.
- Noble [kingdom]: knowledge of the nobility of the kingdom (Heraldry+Recognize).
- Underworld [kingdom]: The equivalent of Noble [kingdom], but for thieves, rogues, smugglers and pirates.
- Wilderness: Renamed from Woodcraft to make it a bit wider in terrain. This would be the survival & orienteering skill.

Quick regional modifiers for Area and Nobles:
Own neighborhood/city +15
Own region +10
Neighboring regions +5
Rest of the kingdom +0

'Kingdoms':
Gondor
Arnor (Eriador, everything west of the Misty Mountains)
Rhovanion (includes pretty much everything north of Gondor and between the Misty Mountains and the Sea of Rhun)
Harad (includes Umbar, south of Gondor)
Rhun (east of the Sea of Rhun, as a rough approximation)
(Mordor, probably not, since once it is re-established, Gondorians are very unwelcome. And before that, there is not much in there to look at.)

Size modifiers:
Main towns & roads: +10
Local villages & paths: +0
'Secret' places & paths: -10 (Elven places would probably have this modifier, too, as they tend to be pretty secretive, save for Rivendell.)

I don't expect people to spend many points on different Kingdoms (or even that many to up their Area [Gondor], which I was thinking to start from 5), but even 5 points spent on one would allow the traveler to have a good chance knowing the main towns and roads, etc. Even a failure would be more likely to be a "I don't know how far it is to the next village, so we might as well stop here for the night, even though we still have some day light left." than a "Welp, we are good and lost, no clue where we are." as long as you stick to the roads. Actual 'shortcuts' would probably be Wilderness Lore (orienteering) as long as someone with Area Lore has told you what to look for ("Head north. Once you come to the river, follow it downstream, and the village you are looking for is on the shore of the lake.").

I am seriously thinking of subsuming Intrigue under Noble [kingdom], too, rather than having it as a separate skill. After all, you intrigue with your knowledge, right? Trading what you know and knowing who to ask and how. On the other hand, someone could have a lot of knowledge and a poor skills at Intrigue... maybe it is worthwhile keeping Intrigue as its own influence skill after all. Have the Noble [kingdom] as a 'this you already know' and Intrigue as 'this you manage to learn'.

Some ideas on using specialties:


The big question is whether to go with just one skill, with modifiers, or have several skills? I think several skills is probably easier. I might give the PCs Area [Arnor] & Noble [Arnor] at 2 points or something; they know something about it! Again, I don't expect those skills to play a major role at first, but if later the campaign focuses on Gondorian expansion into Harad (or Rhun), that Area [Harad] and Noble [Harad] might become very important.



Unarmed combat:
KAP has some rules for brawling (Uses STR or DEX or Grapple) or grappling.

Yep, I was just rereading them.
Punch/kick; Roll DEX.
Grapple: Roll DEX to grapple. STR comes into play only while trying to break free / keeping someone pinned. I might change the latter that you'll have to first win DEX to grapple and then STR vs. STR to throw or pin the opponent. Otherwise, a DEX 18 starting character will be judo-throwing knights left and right... Indeed, it would be a better tactic to start a mounted melee like this (after lance charge). Grab the guy, throw him off his horse (2d6 damage, no armor and no 'save' based on KAP rules). Then you can draw your sword and proceed to chop him to bits, as he is struggling up.

I would keep the knowledge skills different from the social skills. Knowing who Barliman Butterbur is and what his quirks are and who his friends are is a lot different than using that knowledge to your advantage. I would give a person a bonus modifier if he deals with Barliman and has for instance a Area(Bree) skill. Intrigue is sometimes also letting the opponent think you know something or can do something that will hurt him or her and thus having him cooperate.

As for the social skills in my own KAP game I currently use the skills as follows:
Courtesy: The open negotiations and behaving at court. You know hoe to handle yourself among nobility and show finesse.
Folk lore: The gossip and handling commoners. Know what they are talking about and making yourself clear.
Intrigue: The under the table negotiations. Making slight remarks and sometimes even let the enemy think you know things that will hurt him or her. It will also include teh manouvring of others so they will 'support' your goal.

I would keep the knowledge skills different from the social skills. Knowing who Barliman Butterbur is and what his quirks are and who his friends are is a lot different than using that knowledge to your advantage. I would give a person a bonus modifier if he deals with Barliman and has for instance a Area(Bree) skill. Intrigue is sometimes also letting the opponent think you know something or can do something that will hurt him or her and thus having him cooperate.

Yeah, I am convinced.



As for the social skills in my own KAP game I currently use the skills as follows:
Courtesy: The open negotiations and behaving at court. You know hoe to handle yourself among nobility and show finesse.
Folk lore: The gossip and handling commoners. Know what they are talking about and making yourself clear.
Intrigue: The under the table negotiations. Making slight remarks and sometimes even let the enemy think you know things that will hurt him or her. It will also include teh manouvring of others so they will 'support' your goal.

Nice summary. Thanks for that.

The things that bother me with Folk Lore (as portrayed in KAP 5.1) is that it implies that the everyday actions of the peasants are nigh incomprehensible if you don't succeed in your Folk Lore. I find that extremely hard to believe. Sure, the knight might not know the exact details of pig-care and stuff like that, but he can make a pretty educated guess that the plowing and seeding of the fields is necessary for the crops to grow, and a harvest is needed to actually collect that grain. This should, IMHO, be part of Stewardship (turnips need to be planted 2-3 weeks before the last frost of spring) or better yet, just the general world-knowledge (for general knowledge that peasants are planting the next crop around start of spring). Like you don't need a Mechanic skill or even a Driving skill to know what a car is and what it is used for. Also, the failed Folk Lore when communicating: "reveals the knight to be a typical upper-class oppressor, while a fumble indicates a major social gaffe that offends, and possibly gravely insults, the peasant."

So, I think I will opt for this:
Courtesy: Formal, courtly behavior, especially towards a noble superior or an unfamiliar noble.
Carousing: More relaxed social settings (Northmen, commoners, maybe even some nobles). Making 'acquaintances and new friends'. Can lead to gossip being discovered, or set the stage for some additional digging with Intrigue.
Intrigue: Gossip and under the table negotiations. Acting probably would be under this, too, pretending to be someone you are not, or knowing something you don't. (Need to consider/contrast this with Deceitful, though.)

So, just to give an example how this might play out...

Task: Find out what happened to Lord Y, who has disappeared.

1. Hear court gossip that Lord Y was critical of the Usurper. [Intrigue, possibly with bonuses, if it is being whispered at court.]
2. People who do that tend to end up locked in Castle X. [Area/Noble Lore, again possibly with bonuses.]
3. Identify the Castellan of Castle X. [Noble Lore, this can of course be done by someone else. This might also reveal some additional information about the Castellan; is he an avid hunter, or a connoisseur of fine wines, or rumored to have an affair? This could give bonuses later to the social rolls.]
4. Be introduced and make a good impression. [Courtesy, also possibly done by someone else. Also, Courtesy could be used to ask for someone to identify the Castellan, if the PCs struggle. However, this means that there is potentially someone who remembers the PCs deliberately asking about the Castellan, which might lead to a question 'why?'. A cover story would help.]
5. Spend a nice evening with him (now or later, for instance, if he is a huntsman, he probably would react better AFTER you have had a successful hunt together, giving a bonus to the roll). [Carousing or Flirting, for a female PC]
- On a success, he might let it slip that there is a high-born captive in the castle, confirming that the PCs are likely in the right track.
6. Do some additional digging, to tease more information out of the Castellan. [Intrigue, with bonuses if Carousing/Flirting was a success.]
- A success would get him to confirm that yes, it is Lord Y, but he is not supposed to talk about it. The rebels, you know?

I'd probably require a 'setting up' the Intrigue roll with at least Courtesy, to begin a dialog with the Castellan. Pure Intrigue (court gossip) might reveal the mid-tier rumor of a noble being held in the castle, but that is not good enough (unless the roll is a critical).

That is quite a number of rolls, but this would be an example of a more complex, 'digging for state secrets' kind of resolution, for a more cloak-and-dagger type of adventure.


EDIT: Taking a moment to think about how Deceitful and Intrigue work together, I think I might adopt this kind of house rule:
"Intrigue also covers disguises and trying to act as if you were someone else. If you succeed in Deceitful roll (or your Deceitful is already 16+, you don't have to roll) you get +5 to Intrigue. If your Honest is 16+, you automatically fail if if your disguise is challenged, unless you fail your Honest, in which case you roll Intrigue at -5. Note: Many Ithilien Rangers have Directed Trait: Deceitful towards enemies."
What do you think? A good way to connect Intrigue and Deceitful? A bad way?

Folk lore: As I see the skill: In KAP there is a large gap between the noble and the commoner. The Folk lore skill is your ability to cross the gap and make the commoner at ease, so he or she will reveal the infornmation you are looking for. But mainly the skill is used to get the local gossip. Commoners will not be gossip around the nobles, unless they are at ease. Hence the Folk lore skill. And yes I agree with your examples and I would use Stewardship for knowing when to plant. At least if they wish it to be more accurate than 'in the spring'. In Middel Earth I think the gap is not that big and with your new skill Carousing I would probably drop Folk lore as well.

The difference between intrigue and deceitful: While a lot of intrigue is deceitful not all of them. I would guess that even an honest man may be able to detect when he is being played. Honesty will prevent him from being deceitful himself, it does not mean he is naive and unaware that others cannot live up to his standard.

Disguise requires two things to happen:
- Look like the person you want to disguise as.
- Act like the person you want to disguise as.
So you could have the first fall under Intrigue (knowing what to wear and how to look, although this can also be done with observing the enemy) and the second one under Deceitful (act against your nature).
While writing this maybe you could also use other traits:
The hardest part of keeping your disguise and act right can become difficult when the person you are trying to disguise as has a opposite traits. Trying to play a cruel man while you are merciful is much harder to do than if you are cruel yourself. But this can be also on other traits, like chaste/lustful.
You could give a person who is known for his honesty even a penalty for acting against his nature.

Folk lore: As I see the skill: In KAP there is a large gap between the noble and the commoner. The Folk lore skill is your ability to cross the gap and make the commoner at ease, so he or she will reveal the infornmation you are looking for. But mainly the skill is used to get the local gossip. Commoners will not be gossip around the nobles, unless they are at ease. Hence the Folk lore skill. And yes I agree with your examples and I would use Stewardship for knowing when to plant. At least if they wish it to be more accurate than 'in the spring'. In Middel Earth I think the gap is not that big and with your new skill Carousing I would probably drop Folk lore as well.


The gap is not as big, the lords are not supposed to be 'oppressors', and finally, I think the peasants' willingness to gossip should depend a lot on who they are talking to. A local lord known for his Merciful nature would probably have much easier time to get the peasants open up to him about stuff than a bunch of outsiders with cruel mien. Also, I think the local lord should be reasonably well informed what is happening in his own lands, either through the manorial court or through his bailiffs and other officers. Whereas he has very little chance of just inserting himself into the gossip circuit of another holding, since he is an outsider. That is also why I am replacing it with Carousing, since that skill is pretty explicit about needing some time to get people to warm up to you. Granted, you could claim that Folk Lore acts in the same way, needing a prelude before you can actually get some information out of the peasants (which is how I GM it in KAP).




The difference between intrigue and deceitful: While a lot of intrigue is deceitful not all of them. I would guess that even an honest man may be able to detect when he is being played. Honesty will prevent him from being deceitful himself, it does not mean he is naive and unaware that others cannot live up to his standard.


That showcases another overlap... is your ability to detect lies Honest, Deceitful or Suspicious? I generally go for the last one. So High Trusting indicates naiveté, and combined with High Honesty, it might be portrayed as 'I would never do something like that, so I can't believe other people would, either'.



Disguise requires two things to happen:
- Look like the person you want to disguise as.
- Act like the person you want to disguise as.
So you could have the first fall under Intrigue (knowing what to wear and how to look, although this can also be done with observing the enemy) and the second one under Deceitful (act against your nature).
While writing this maybe you could also use other traits:
The hardest part of keeping your disguise and act right can become difficult when the person you are trying to disguise as has a opposite traits. Trying to play a cruel man while you are merciful is much harder to do than if you are cruel yourself. But this can be also on other traits, like chaste/lustful.
You could give a person who is known for his honesty even a penalty for acting against his nature.

I would not expect people to generally disguise themselves as specific, well-known individuals, since that only happens in modern and sci-fi spy/action movies with realistic looking facemasks. :P They can claim to be someone else (D'Artagnan pretending to be Rochefort in Three Musketeers movie to use Rochefort's passport to travel to England), but if the harbor master would have known Rochefort personally, it clearly would not have worked, as D'Artagnan looked nothing like Rochefort.

A High Honest person would naturally have HUGE problems with pretending to be someone else. I might allow Passion rolls (Loyalty comes to mind) to try and get inspired in Deceitful, though, if it is a mission-critical lie.

Hmm. On reflection, it might be easiest to take disguises out of Intrigue and keep it and lying convincingly under Deceitful, instead. But Intrigue and Courtesy definitely have some 'social lying' built in. I mean, you can feel anyway you wish about that Haradrim diplomat, but you will smile and be polite with him (unless you have Hate 16+, in which case, you might not bother being polite). Needless to say, High Honest characters would not do well at all in a cloak-and-dagger scenario.

So, again an example:

Task: To sneak through enemy-held territory unhampered.

1. Area Lore would help with disguises (knowledge of the local costumes and customs) and with routes (less frequented routes or routes with loads of traffic, so that you can hide in the caravans). Noble Lore [enemy] would help if pretending to be part of some enemy lord's forces.
2. Assuming they are caught by an enemy patrol, but they are in disguise as enemy troops, Language [enemy] would be vital in answering them. Noble Lore or Area Lore might help in identifying the patrol's origins and maybe craft the story a bit better. Actually convincing the patrol would be Deceitful vs. Suspicious, with bonuses/penalties depending on the story. For instance, a slight accent in Language might be explained away by being from a different region than the patrol, claiming it is a regional accent ('Everyone in my home talks like this, it is your speech that sounds foreign to me.'), whereas claiming to serve the same lord as the patrol would likely go down very poorly.

Here is my skill list at the moment. I dropped Compose, since it an easily be covered by Orate, Play or Singing, respectively. It might look a bit messy at the moment; I just cut and pasted it from an excel character sheet I was working on and I can't be bothered to clean it up.

Possibly of interest is the fact that I decided to adopt the attribute default ideas that have been suggested from time to time on this forum. I opted for APP/3 default for most of the performance and social skills (with the exceptions of Carousing and Dancing, which have also CON & DEX contribution). I also went ahead and gave Awareness a CON/3 default. I am aware that this makes chargen a touch more challenging, but I don't think it is too difficult. And frankly, anyone who wishes to munchkin a 3-point higher APP in the beginning for a few extra skill points is not really a problem for me... It does mean that since the starting skill values are in many cases floated off APP, then lady characters get a bit of a 'free benefit' there, but I am not bothered by that, either. In addition, I'll increase their 'free' skill points to counter the high base weapon skills given to knight/warrior characters (10 vs. 5 of the ladies). Rogue characters probably follow ladies when it comes to skills: they have extra skill points but not as high base weapon skills, since they have not spent their youth learning to use weapons, but how to sneak around, etc.

Note that these are the base skills, determined right after the Attributes are assigned, but before the 'squire' phase of assigning miscellaneous points, or the aging to the starting date of the mini-campaign, although if they don't spend points to increasing those skills from the default, then the default does increase with later attribute increases. However, if they raise the skill say from default 3 to 4 with skill points, and later their attribute increases to make the default 4, then 4 it is. They don't gain/recover extra skill points. Again, I don't expect this to be a major effect or something to get concerned about.

Lore and Weapon skills have some empty slots in case some other lore specializations or weapons are gained. Numenoreans are famous for their steel longbows, so I don't think they would have the same cultural bias against archery as Arthurian Knights have. Hence, Bow is listed as one of the starting weapons.

Skills
Awareness CON/3
Carousing (C+A)/5
Chirurgery 0
Courtesy APP/3
Craft:
- Bone & Wood 0
- Cloth & Leather 0
- Metal 0
- Stone 0
Dancing (D+A)/5
First Aid 10
Flirting APP/3
Hunting 2
Intrigue APP/3
Lore:
- Ancient 2
- Animal 0
- Area [Gondor] 2
- Herb 0
- Noble [Gondor] 2
- Underworld [Gondor] 0
- Wilderness 2
- [lore] 0
- [lore] 0
- [lore] 0
- [lore] 0
- [lore] 0
Orate APP/3
Play APP/3
Read 0
Seamanship 2
Singing APP/3
Sleight of Hand DEX/3
Stealth DEX/2
Stewardship 2
Swimming DEX

Combat skills
Battle 10
Horsemanship 10

Weapon Skills
Sword 10
Lance 10
Dagger 10
Spear 10
Bow 10
[weapon] 10
[weapon] 10

Language Skills
Adunaic 15
Sindarin 0
Daenic 0

What is the reasoning behind the link between Awareness and CON?

What is the reasoning behind the link between Awareness and CON?

*handwave* Good health = good eyesight. It is mainly there to give CON a bit of a boost, too. Remember that I am only considering humans here. It is not a big deal either way, as I expect most CON to be in the 12 - 18 range. So it is a difference of +-1 from the default 5.

(Tolkien's Elves have totally overpowered Awareness based on Legolas. Something like 25 to start with would not be out of place. Frankly, I might even treat the Elven Awareness differently by messing with the modifiers, making telescopic vision -possible- for them even on a regular success. This would still allow them to be surprised now and again.)

So, it has been almost two years since I posted here and almost year and a half since we made the characters and started playing, so I figure this might be a good moment to pause and look back at what worked and what did not.


PACING

Due to my slow pace and going through decade by decade rather than glossing a century as originally planned, the campaign just managed to reach the War of the Last Alliance. I'll need to pick up my pace! :P We just made new, 1st generation Gondorians (born in Middle-earth rather than in Numenor) characters, since 3 of the 5 player characters died in the opening stages of the War of the Last Alliance, in heroic last stands to delay the surprise invasion of Ithilien.

With the War of the Last Alliance (which was my original pick for the starting date, before deciding to do a prologue generation), things will speed up and it will be more year by year, although some years are more eventful than the others. We did play through some years already earlier, of course, but then skipped through a decade at a time, too.

I am still not happy with the family management. Granted, that will become more of a non-issue, as we pretty much won't care about the distant cousins after a generation or two any more, and the focus will shift much more on what the current PK is doing, rather than what the whole family is up to (which will be covered in a couple of rolls and decisions, I am thinking).


STATS

As expected, the Numenoreans have scary high stats, but they are not immortal. Also, players generally went for 7d6 and were satisfied with that, focusing more on skills. The limit of only 3 increases to stats after adolescence helped, of course, since in practice it meant that they got +3 to STR & CON and that was it. Glory points were generally used to boost their main skills, especially Craft (see below), Sword and Battle.


TRAITS

I may have made it a bit too easy to collect high Traits. With 6 traits starting at 13 and one at 15, and 7 points to distribute, the characters have easily 3 Traits at 16+. Then during Education (20 to 30), they get another 3 Trait or Passion points, so they easily have 4 Traits at 16+. From there, it is not that far to collecting all 7 Religious Traits. On the other hand, they were supposed to be the Faithful of Numenor... :) I may introduce some culture shift as the years go by, with the Gondorians starting to stray a bit from their path. Proud, especially, is easy to justify as Gondor becomes the pre-eminent power in Middle-Earth, distracting people from the Modest.

I did make the religious bonus, Blessed by the Valar, way too strong, and will be pruning that back. It pretty much gave everyone +1 to all stats, 35 yearly Glory and +40 years to their lifespans. Without the stat bonus, it is not nearly as overpowered, especially as instead of playing through a century+, we will focus more on a couple of decades. Although on the other hand, I can see the argument that then it is not worth it, since no one is going to die of old age anyway. Which is true. Then again, it already has two overlapping sub-components, Gentle Healer (+5 modifier to First Aid and Chirurgery rolls) and Noble Warrior (+5 modifier to Valorous, +3 HP), which together form the Blessed by the Valar. So you kinda already get good bang for your buck, even if the ADDITIONAL bonus of gathering both is not that great.


PASSIONS

No problems here.


SKILLS

The skill default system from attributes was almost instantly deemed to be too fiddly. Hence, we simply said that as soon as you had selected your attributes, the skill defaults would be calculated. So those who did put points to DEX and APP did get a small benefit out of it, enough to make it worthwhile for a courtier type of character to be pretty. Also, the fact that we used APP Glory instead of 10 Glory for skill successes helped to popularize APP for courtier types.

Lore skills were underutilized. This is of course on the GM, since if the missions don't require the skills, then the skills are not useful. I am thinking that Lore: Animals and Lore: Herbs need to be folded into other skills. I am thinking either Wilderness or Hunting (or both, whichever is higher?) for Lore: Animals, and Chirurgery for Lore: Herbs. This also helps to keep the number of skills down.

Craft: Metal and Craft: Stone were used a lot (two players focused on those skills, one each), other Craft skills not so much. Either you spent points to become a Master (20+) in it, able to start crafting magical weapons and things like the tower of Orthanc, or you didn't bother at all. Not really surprising, as it does require a significant amount of time to get the skill up high enough to really do something that is not available with simple money. So you go all out or not at all.

Naturally, their lands being in North Ithilien, the PKs didn't really use Seamanship nor Swimming in this case. But those skills will become more useful when Gondor's focus turns back to the sea.