When a knight becomes a member of the Round Table, according to the rulebook, King Arthur bestows him land to ensure he becomes a Rich Knight. Since some of the Knights of the Round Table include Earls, Barons and Kings, this seems to imply that the Round Table Knights go beyond the sphere of noble rank to inclue Rich Vassal Knights, Bannerets, Dukes, Earl, Kings and so forth. Am I understanding this correctly?

The corebook also states that Arthur bestows, and I quote: [...] all other benefits of a leading courtier of the realm. What does this mean exactly?

The rulebook also states: Knights of the Round Table act as leaders in war, especially as officers over other knights, war councilors, bodyguards to the Pendragon, and as an elite battle unit. Does this mean they receive some office position? Would a "mere" Rich Vassal Knight of the Round Table become a leader of other non-Round Table Knights Lords of High Ranking (Bannerets, Dukes, Kings) say, for instance, as leader of a conroi or company? Or would Arthur bestow benefits according to each knight's particular noble rank?

The Book of Estate suggests that an Estate should be given for a single event worth 800 Glory. Since becoming a Round Table Knight is worth 1000 Glory, would this qualify?

(All things considered, I think this should be moved to the Rules section of the forums).

When a knight becomes a member of the Round Table, according to the rulebook, King Arthur bestows him land to ensure he becomes a Rich Knight. Since some of the Knights of the Round Table include Earls, Barons and Kings, this seems to imply that the Round Table Knights go beyond the sphere of noble rank to inclue Rich Vassal Knights, Bannerets, Dukes, Earl, Kings and so forth. Am I understanding this correctly?


I am not quite sure what you are asking about, here. A seat in the Round Table is separate of a man's title.



The corebook also states that Arthur bestows, and I quote: [...] all other benefits of a leading courtier of the realm. What does this mean exactly?


Being recognized as one of the best knights in the world. I'd presume that they rank up with the Barons in precedence, and they have the King's ear. If they need a moment of Arthur's time, he will make time for them.



The rulebook also states: Knights of the Round Table act as leaders in war, especially as officers over other knights, war councilors, bodyguards to the Pendragon, and as an elite battle unit. Does this mean they receive some office position? Would a "mere" Rich Vassal Knight of the Round Table become a leader of other non-Round Table Knights Lords of High Ranking (Bannerets, Dukes, Kings) say, for instance, as leader of a conroi or company? Or would Arthur bestow benefits according to each knight's particular noble rank?


Office is again separate from being a Round Table Knight. Some have it, some don't. Sir Griflet is the Marshal of Logres (after Sir Brastias, I think), so he commands the King's Army when the King is unavailable by the virtue of his office, even though as far as I know, he lacks a noble title other than a knight (of the Round Table).

During the Roman War, Sir Lamorak leads the contingent that takes Barfleur, at the start of the war, but this is a smallish army and Lamorak could claim to be a prince in exile, as far as title is concerned. Sir Bedevere leading a small army to Paris, which may have included Barons, and definitely included one Prince/King (Lancelot). Sir Bedevere himself is Arthur's Cupbearer/Dapifier, and IIRC the brother of the Duke of Lindsey, but holds no higher title of his own. So yes, if Arthur say that this knight will lead the army, then the knight will lead the army, regardless of his title, since he is acting on the High King's authority. But a Round Table Knight couldn't (or shouldn't) just ride to a random baron's castle and start bossing the baron around.



The Book of Estate suggests that an Estate should be given for a single event worth 800 Glory. Since becoming a Round Table Knight is worth 1000 Glory, would this qualify?


No (but see below), just as getting Knighted (1000) or married to a widow (1000) is not worthy of an Estate. The 800 Glory limit is supposed to refer to heroics that the character has done, like defeat a Dragon single-handedly, or really distinguishing himself on the field of battle (just complaining briefly here that getting 800+ Glory is way too easy in BoB2, nor is it particularly hard during Arthur's big battles using the old system, either). In the end, GM has to judge it.

However, the incident that qualifies the knight to the Round Table might very well qualify him to an estate, too, such as saving Arthur's life. Also, as you said in the beginning, it does state that if the knight has been deemed worthy of a Seat at the Round Table, Arthur will grant him land enough to be considered a Rich Knight. Since this means (in BotE) £40 or more, I'd be inclined to just round it to £50 and call it an Estate. So while the Glory gained at being appointed to the Round Table doesn't qualify you to an Estate, everything leading up to it very well might.

That being said, I personally would just have Arthur just pay the higher upkeep for those knights. Why? Because it frigging breaks the economy, that is why! We have numbers for Logres in BotW and BoU, and if Arthur is chucking £50 estates around to every Round Table Knight (150), that is £7500 worth of estates. Now, when you get to post-Badon times, there is plenty of recently (re)conquered Saxon land to share, but if he is doing this in 514, he is limited to Logres and has those 100 knights that Leondegrance already inducted into the Round Table. King's demesne in BoU is just a bit over £2000. It simply won't work in pre-Badon times. Post-Badon, you have a reasonably long period during which the Round Table stays more or less constant. Sure, some die off in the wars, but by and large, the younger knights who survive Badon have a good chance of being around until the Grail Quest. So you don't have to make so many new grants (note, grants of lands which will be inherited by the children rather than going back to Arthur). But after the Grail Quest, half of the table is dead again (grants stay with their families), and there are no new conquests. Arthur would have to come up with another £4000 in lands.

No, I am simply going to assume that KAP 5.1 was written well before Greg even started thinking about how much land there would be in Logres... OR, I just had an Idea, the grant of land being referred to is £3-£9 free income, earmarked for Standard of Living. Now, this will still strain the royal demesne, but much less, since Arthur can simply use household knight 'slots' for that. He is the King, after all.

Anyway, in my campaign, no chance of an estate. You might get a manor. :P

I am not quite sure what you are asking about, here. A seat in the Round Table is separate of a man's title.

That's precisely my question: so, who would have precedence, a Knight of the Round Table or a Baron (assuming the Baron is not a KoTRT and the KoTRT is not a Baron)? If the KoTRT is the vassal of Honorius of Gwent, does he still receive orders from Honorius (or just directly from Arthur)?


Being recognized as one of the best knights in the world. I'd presume that they rank up with the Barons in precedence, and they have the King's ear. If they need a moment of Arthur's time, he will make time for them.

See my previous question.

That's precisely my question: so, who would have precedence, a Knight of the Round Table or a Baron (assuming the Baron is not a KoTRT and the KoTRT is not a Baron)? If the KoTRT is the vassal of Honorius of Gwent, does he still receive orders from Honorius (or just directly from Arthur)?


Of course he would; he is still a VASSAL of Honorius. His elevation to a Round Table Knight has absolutely no impact on his vassal oath to Honorius, but it is likely that Arthur would request (and Honorius acquiesce) that Fealty (Arthur) becomes Homage (Arthur) and Homage (Honorius) becomes Fealty (Honorius). Hence, Arthur would have first dibs on the new Round Table Knight's services.

Precedence is a SOCIAL construct. It has nothing to do with the chain of command nor vassalage. It simply means that Honorius, as a Baron, would not consider a normal knight his social equal, but a Knight of the Round Table would be. Think about seating order or who enters first.

I agree with Morien here,

Including Arthur putting them on the payroll rather than giving out estates to each one.
However, when a knight is already a noble, and lives as a Rich Knight, there is no need for Arthur to grant additional income to him.