One of my players has a character who is both a Chivalrous AND Religious knight. Naturally, I would like to test his character in several traits, so I ask for test ideas (ANY ideas) to test the following Traits:

Chaste 16 / Lustful 4
Energetic 16 / Lazy 4
Modest 18 / Proud 2
Valorous 17 / Cowardly 3

I have a good idea for the rest of the traits. Here's my thought: most of the time, a player will NEVER choose a negative trait to roleplay. For instance, no one wants to get a check on Cowardly or Lazy and players tend to portray their PK as Energetic and Valorous as possible. So, I'm looking for ways to test these. I don't want to necessarily force them to get a check on the opposite negative trait, but at least to give them pause and consider the potential consequences of choosing the 'good' trait over the 'bad' trait. So any suggestions?

I have a good idea for the rest of the traits. Here's my thought: most of the time, a player will NEVER choose a negative trait to roleplay.


More than that, with Traits 16+, he CANNOT choose to roleplay the opposite, unless he fails in the 16+ Trait first.
(Huh, now that I look at KAP 5.1, it only says that the PK needs to roll regardless of whether he wishes to follow the Trait or not. But I think the consensus of the Forum was that the 16+ Chaste guy can act Chaste 100% of the time in normal circumstances, i.e. when Chaste 10 guy could choose, too.)

So the thing is to come up with temptations that force a test (i.e. a roll) against the trait.

Chaste: Rather than just a buxom serving wench, it is a faerie lady, a succubus or a handmaiden of Morgan who is making advances on the knight's virtue, backed up by some magic. More 'mundane' ones might involve a lady with APP 20+ flirting successfully with the knight or some such.

Energetic: I would require Energetic rolls for all-nighters (travel, partying, guarding, whatever), whether or not the Trait is 16+. You choose whether to try, but the ability to do so is governed by the roll.

Modest: It should be possible to come up with situations where bragging is actually beneficial. In our campaign, there was a situation where two RTKs (both PKs) were candidates to lead a small army: which one of you is the best for the task? Naturally, the Famously Proud Pagan declared that he is, while the Famously Modest Christian was reluctant to toot his own horn. As the result, the Proud Pagan got the job. Also, bragging about your deeds in feasts and such nets some extra Glory, as the tales of your prowess reach a wider audience. It might not be very Chivalrous and Christian to brag, but that's part of the point: there is a downside to being meek. Another possible situation is when the host or someone they need to cultivate is a Proud Pagan himself and values that Trait more than Modest. So speaking Modestly might imperil whatever mission the PKs are on. Final thought is that someone else who is involved might be bragging about their deeds, making it seem like they did most of the work, with the Modest PK just tagging along, even though it is the opposite. Will the PK keep his mouth shut? This could of course be a Honest test, too.

Valorous: Easiest of all. Just have Monsters which force the PK to roll Valorous before engaging them.

All the above being said, given that the PK needs to first FAIL in the 16+ Trait and then SUCCEED in the 4- Trait, the chance of him doing that are 0.2 * 0.2 = 0.04 = 4%. And even less if the trait is more than 16. So all that happens is that the PK will get a check in the Famous Trait anyway.

Some of my ideas:

Chaste: You need a Lady to do something or give you something and she wants something in return. If you refuse her advances you do not get what you want as she refuses just to spite you.

Energetic: You have to travel a long distance, but the safety of a lady/your lord/the king depends on you arriving on time. The travel takes several days. Do you take a rest knowing that this means you may arrive too late?

Or you have arrived at a lords manor and you need something from him. He is a bit of a partygoer and he orders a week long revelry of eating, drinking and fun. To impress the lord you must remain awake and feasting until the end (or at least as long as the lord remains himself).

Modest:
Modest is a real christian trait and as both the Saxons and the northern Pagans are proud people you will get into conflict.
A pagan lord accepts you in his home and you were ordered by the king to broker a peace with this lordship. Unfortunately the lord's son sees you as a rival and begins to tease you about your valor and how you are not even worthy of the name of knight. Tells us your geat deeds.

Valor:
A nice problem when you have given the above son some reply of your deeds. The lord can use such a brave knight as he has a monster in his realm that needs to be dealt with.

All the above being said, given that the PK needs to first FAIL in the 16+ Trait and then SUCCEED in the 4- Trait, the chance of him doing that are 0.2 * 0.2 = 0.04 = 4%. And even less if the trait is more than 16. So all that happens is that the PK will get a check in the Famous Trait anyway.

Hence my point in testing the traits. The situation should be compelling enough that the player will want to act AGAINST the 16+ trait even if in the end he will not. Others in the group, whose Traits are nor famous, may get their due "rewards" because they are not compelled to act one way or the other.

Ah, I see what you mean now.

Well, Lustful could be used kinda like Modest/Proud in what I and Cornelius suggested about Pagan Lords. Maybe this is a Pagan Queen/Enchantress (maybe Morgan Le Fay herself!) who is demanding to know if the knight finds her desirable, etc. Nice flattery with passion (i.e. successful Lustful) earns her favor, while Chaste would offend her, leading to a trip to a dungeon. Of course, Lustfully bedding serving wenches tends to bear fruit, literally, in bastard sons and daughters, who might help to fill out the family tree if the marriage is delayed/not producing so many children.

Energetic might see a knight riding into the night in a thunderstorm after a long day's travel already, to deliver a message or something, while his Lazy friends get to spend the evening chatting with the host and his court, with opportunities for skill rolls etc. But yeah, it is hard to come by with situations where Energetic is a disadvantage. Maybe a magical bed in a Faerie castle that will heal all of your wounds in a night, but only if you manage to drop off to sleep at a drop of a hat -> Lazy.

Modest has been dealt already.

Valorous suffers from the same problem as Energetic. Knights are supposed to be valorous, and cowardice is one of the worst insults you can level to a knight. One way to make the Cowardly beneficial tends to come off as hosing the player character, since you would have to make it tough and dangerous enough to tempt the knights to not risk it: "Is there no one here brave enough to fight this firebreathing demon knight one on one? Come now, step up, he has only killed a dozen of my knights so far!" And if you don't make the enemy dangerous enough, then you are rewarding Valorous with easy Glory. (Granted, RTKs would probably figure that fighting whatever opponent is part of the job description. My players tended to call becoming a RTK "The Kiss of Death", since it meant that Arthur started giving them quests which usually involved fighting monsters beyond the capabilities of ordinary knights. The average survival time was a few years after joining the Round Table...)

I find that Energetic and Valorous combine to push up your Reckless and I have no sympathy or mercy for a PK that never backs down, never waits and never thinks of a plan before rushing in. They wanted that character so you give it to them and while they win it will be great and they will gain a bunch of glory and prizes and then one day they will reach too far and die in a blaze of glory.

That's what they wanted after all so give it to them.

Less final solutions include Energetic always wanting to be up and on the road at dawn when the fog is still heavy so they get lost and get to have a lovely new adventure that means they fail the task they set out for, but they still get similar glory. That's pretty Arthurian in my book.

Have a lady challenge all those who come to her keep to a test of courage. Those who fail are refused entry while those who succeed must spend the night with one of her maids (or her if a knight crits or is solo perhaps). Refusal of the latter breaks the terms of the challenge and at the very least also means refusal of entry. If they can't gain entry to her castle then they need to find another route for their quest or just be Out of the Story.

More to the point, I don't want the player to loose his Chivalrous and/or Religious status. But I feel he must "justify" his Traits. After all, he's earning annual Glory so he must be tested harder than the average knight. Upholding ideals should be hard and it's rare the arthurian knight who does not have one or two negative traits. I'm also of the opinion that, as long as the player is roleplaying is famous trait, he should be forced to roll, except in special circumstances (magic, tests of virtue, etc.) so I have to devise situations where going the opposite way is the more desirable way.