So I have book of the manor, and I enjoy the idea that some unique and interesting calamity's and benefits could happen at a knights manor. But I wasn't a fan of all the listings on the tables and the way they are generated.

BTW all page numbers are for 5.2

For example having a dragon raid is as likely as a bandit raid.

So I made my own and took out what I didn't like and added stuff I do like!

I also made these tables keeping in mind the percentage chances on a 3d6, if you would like to see those chances then here: http://anydice.com/program/1

New Manorial Calamities

3d6
3: Giant moves into area, roll 1d20 (1-10 small; 11-18 standard; 19-20 Huge)
4-5: No Training this year
6-7: Village elder dies! Gain 1d6+3 Fate
8-9: Dispute among peasants, Justice Event!
10-11: Increase Hate Landlord by 1d3. Why? Because peasants are finicky like that.
12-13: Bad omen! Gain 1d6 Fate
14-15: Make a new enemy!
16-17: Bandits have moved into the area, and will continue to cause problems, +1d6 Fate, and +2 to Hate Landlord
18: A Faerie from the Other World comes to visit….

New Manorial Benefits

3d6
3: Liege gives you Hardened Chain-mail (12 Armor)*
4-5: Mentor rests in your manor over winter. Choose 2 training options this year.
6-7: Make a new friend!
8-9: Excellent accounting! +1d6 to Stewardship roll this year
10-11: Liege visits and gifts £1d6.
12-13: Good omen! Loose 1d6 Fate
14-15: Wandering Merchant offers half price on tapestries which double in value as treasure.
16-17:Builders owe you a favor. £1d6 of the next improvement is paid for.
18: A Faerie from the Other World comes to visit….

*Will have to change this as armor/time advances.

Now you'll notice that both of them have an option for a Faerie coming to visit. If a player rolls an 18 on the Benefit table then the Faerie will be a boon, but on the calamity table it'll be a hindrance. Now I enjoy having Faerie Beings from The Other World being incredibly strange and weird. I also think that if the player rolls an 18 on either table, the Faerie should cause some big change at least for a period of time on the land or character.

For inspiration on the Faeries, who they are, what they do, how they help or hurt the knights, I use a book called Fire on the Velvet Horizon

http://www.lulu.com/shop/scrap-princess-and-patrick-stuart/fire-on-the-velvet-horizon/paperback/product-22807768.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPKe_YeYZAE Here's a review of the book that also gives some examples of the stuff in it.

This book is filled with weird ideas that I love. Just has an example if the player rolls an 18 on the Benefit table, I'll have them meet a Cryptospider. Which is a tiny, puny, weak spider that makes a deal with the knight. If the knight feeds the spider then the spider will make it's web near the players bed.

The Cryptospider's web can't catch flies but it can catch forgotten memories.

So while the Cryptospider lives near the player's bed I'll give the player 2 chances to increase skills that they failed the roll too increase and were checked during play (not by improvements). This is representative of when the player got a critical success they were able to do the task very well but maybe didn't cement it into memory.

I don't know how long the spider will live, but there's only a .5 or something chance that the players will see it, so i can afford to figure it out later.

Now another thing to note is that the tables have a meet a friend/enemy entry.

https://gspendragon.wordpress.com/2010/02/15/book-of-solos/

This chart is a little hard to read but if you look at the middle-top area on the first page it says "Enemy". That table has a bunch of stuff to figure out info about how the knight made a new enemy, who they are, and how angry they are. If you just flip the words from "hate" to words that mean the opposite this also works for figuring out who the Knights new friend is.



Now under Manorial Calamities there's an entry for having bandits in the area. I read somewhere in one of the books that the only way to handle bandits is through play! So I thought it would be cool if this would be an opportunity to use skirmish rules. But I need to know about the Bandits first, and it would help if the process was random so that I don't need to keep making new bandits, and it would have some nice cool rare moments, which are fun for me as the GM to think of.

So here's what I've come up with:

First roll a 2d6 to determine the amount of bandits in the area

2-100 Strong
3- 50 Strong
4- 40 Strong
5- 30 Strong
6-8- 20 Strong
9- 30 Strong
10- 40 Strong
11-50 Strong
12- 100 Strong

If even the 6-8 (most common results) seem too big, which they kinda do to me. I justify it by the fact that bandits are probably a common problem but they're only a serious one that need to be dealt with by the players like this when they are big, and there isn't that much of a chance this will happen either.

On rolls of 2 or 12 the Bandits are considered serious, regional threats, and the knights liege will send some knights (maybe friends of the players or famous knights like Sir Lycus) along with 1d3 librum for mercenaries to assist.

Otherwise this is a matter for the player knight to solve. The player should on their own be encourage to ask friendly NPC knights for help, and of course the other players, and otherwise take initiative on their own to protect their lands.

Now we need to know who the leader of the bandits is. Who's the guy that will be leading them into battle?

2d6
2-Renegade Knight, Battle Skill 20
3-Chieftain* Battle Skill 15
4-Warrior* Battle Skill 13
5- Above Average Bandit Battle Skill 9
6-8-Above Average Foot Soldier Battle Skill of 7
9- Above Average Bandit Battle Skill 9
10- Warrior* Battle Skill 13
11-Chieftain* Battle Skill 15
12- Renegade Knight, Battle Skill 20

*Use Saxon Chieftain, Saxon Warrior, or Pictish Warrior stats. You can also use the tables found on pages 247-251 to try to help find some stats for the leader.

Now we'll also determine the average quality of the bandits.

1d20
1-10: Low Quality, Peasants, see page 246 for stats
11-18: Medium Quality, Foot Soldiers page 206
19-20: High Quality, Warriors page 206 or 207

Alright one last homebrew rule!

If the knights outnumber the enemies enough to receive a bonus (See page 249, I know these are technically for big battles but I think applying them to skirmishes makes sense) such as 2:1, then give the enemy commander a modifier bonus to their Battle Skill equal to the bonus the knights receive for having a larger army, but the bonus only applies to the first tactics roll.

The logic behind this is that this would mean the bandits are quicker and probably don't want to engage with the larger army, that will probably win. So to reflect the difficulty the knight commander had in forcing a confrontation, while also making sure they were in a tactically sound position, we can give a bonus to the bandits.


But that's it!

I hope you at least enjoyed reading this and I really hope maybe someone might use these or at least hold on to some of the ideas.

Please feel free to critique the stuff here, maybe there's stuff I missed, or I'm just dumb and made a bad decision somewhere. Either way I would love to hear what anyone has to say.

Quite interesting, thanks for sharing. I only read them through once so I haven't fully digested them yet, but I do like using skirmish rules in the case of large groups of bandits. Rather than having the first roll be Battle, though, I'd make it an Opposed Hunting resolution. I'd also probably halve the bandit numbers except during Anarchy. I'd also apply some modifier to get a tougher bandit leader the bigger the bandit group is, like moving the results away from the center a step or two steps depending on group size. Also, Battle 20 is already pretty high. Most knights would have 15, which is plenty for a robber knight. I'd actually be tempted to switch a knight and a chieftain, since the latter is more likely to be his own unit commander while only about 10% of the knights are. Still, Battle 18 would be enough, IMHO.

I didn't even consider using a hunting roll instead of a battle roll, that makes a lot more sense for what it's trying to accomplish.

And that's also a great idea to increase bandit numbers during Anarchy.

Deriving the bandit leader from how tough the group is also makes more sense than how I did it. I think at least part of the reason I didn't even think about that is because I made the bandit quality last, but the leader second. idk. Good idea!

I was thinking that a Renegade Knight would be far less likely to happen than a tough chieftain, and would be a much bigger story event, so would get the less likely tier.

I definitely think it's a good idea to drop the last tiers combat skill to 18.

Personally I'll have to think about it more but I think I'll leave knights on the last tier because it would be a much bigger story moment and I would say it's less likely for a knight to leave their liege and take up arms with bandits in an act of treason.

Thank you so much for the help Morien!

I was also thinking about including some rule where knights could call upon their villages to make a force for fighting the bandits.

How would you determine the amount of peasants the knight can recruit? Would a knight be able to recruit however many fighting capable males as they want from the village without incurring an increase to Hate Landlord.

Or is it the Knights job to get mercenaries in order to fight the bandits?

Or should some roll be made to determine how many peasants can be convinced to serve under the knight for this purpose.

And obviously I'm assuming that if the knight brings peasants and the knight takes significant losses this can hurt the income of the village and increase Hate Landlord.

I'm sorry for bombarding you with so many questions but you seem like you know a lot. Any advice would be well appreciated.

Its a knight's duty to protect his land, not the peasants'. That's why he gets the big house and doesn't have to work his land.

A typical vassal knight with a single manor has 4 fighting men: the knight, his squire, and two footmen. He probably has a few esquires and a bailiff with some toughs when things get really hairy. These latter men won't have any real wargear, though, and their main duty is running the manor so their loss could be crippling to the knight's income. He also has a kennel with hunting dogs. Never underestimate the fear caused by a couple of mastiffs, compare their stats to those of bandits, and even common dogs are just as skilled as your typical bandit.

In open battle a knight ought to have no trouble dealing with even a dozen bandits: charge, ride through, wheel about, repeat. But the trouble with bandits is that they avoid anything that looks like open battle. That's why they are hard to get rid of; they hide out in rough terrain where ambushes are easy and lance charges are hard. So that means going in on your riding horse to avoid losing an expensive charger or courser, and hiring some mercenaries if there are a lot of bandits. This is also where having allies comes in. The other single-manor vassals are likely companions of yours and if a few of you get together to assist each other when bandits or other threats arise then you can make very short work of that rabble.

And that's also a great idea to increase bandit numbers during Anarchy.


Speaking of the numbers, I would change 50 to 60. That way, it increases more smoothly: 40 -> 60 (x1.5) -> 100 (x1.66), rather than x1.25 and x2.



Deriving the bandit leader from how tough the group is also makes more sense than how I did it. I think at least part of the reason I didn't even think about that is because I made the bandit quality last, but the leader second. idk. Good idea!


I did mean to tie it to the size of the bandit group, figuring that you need a more badass leader to keep a bigger group together, rather than the quality of the average bandit, which is probably anti-correlated with the size (easier to get a large rabble than a large group of professional soldiers). But I could see tying the leader quality to the bandit quality rather than size, or take a modifier from both.

Speaking of bandit quality: I'd probably have the foot soldiers and warriors on the same level and then decide based on the location. For instance, in post-Badon Anglia, the bandits are almost certainly Anglian rebels, whereas in Salisbury, unemployed Cymric mercenaries would be more believable.



I was thinking that a Renegade Knight would be far less likely to happen than a tough chieftain, and would be a much bigger story event, so would get the less likely tier.

Personally I'll have to think about it more but I think I'll leave knights on the last tier because it would be a much bigger story moment and I would say it's less likely for a knight to leave their liege and take up arms with bandits in an act of treason.


I disagree, since there are plenty of mercenary knights around, who, if unemployed, are not sworn to any lord and might turn to banditry for survival or for profit. Happened in France during the Hundred Years' War all the time (especially after the Battle of Poitiers). On the other hand, a chieftain by his very title would probably have a social role and a home to return to (invalid after Badon, perhaps).

Hmm. The easiest solution might be to put them on the same level, same as with the foot soldiers / warriors above, and just link the leader to the correct group: mercenaries turning to banditry are led by a knight, whereas the warriors are led by a chieftain.


Thank you so much for the help Morien!

You are quite welcome! Like I have mentioned before in this Forum, the main advantage of having a Forum is that you can exchange ideas with other GMs and shamelessly steal the good ones for your own campaign. :)


I was also thinking about including some rule where knights could call upon their villages to make a force for fighting the bandits.


scarik already gave a good answer. Most of the peasants are serfs, not freemen. While they would no doubt fight to defend their homes and loved ones if their homes are attacked (and they can't flee to safety), it is the social contract that the knight does the fighting whenever possible. In addition, in a game about chivalric valor and noblesse oblige, it would be very strange for the knight to drive poorly-armed and -trained peasants into the fight as arrowfodder. :P Besides, soon you will have the peasants being used to distract dragons and giants, and that is very far from heroic Arthurian ideal. Like scarik says, a mutual-help society formed by the PKs is more than a match for most bandit groups.

That being said, there is a 1285 law about hue-and-cry, which basically calls for all men of the county to assist in the capture of an outlaw caught in the act. The 'Stop, Thief!' -scenario. I could see this applying to serfs, too, but I would save it for Tournament Period or something like that, when most of the Kingdom knows Pax Arthuriana (as I call it). The real history analog for Uther is early 1100s, and Anarchy is The Anarchy in mid-1100s... Although one should be careful not to draw direct comparisons with real history, since the social and the geopolitical context is very much different.

The peasant levy of 4th edition was set at 5d20 able-bodied men per manor, which is OK enough, IMHO. Finally, I might allow like 10% of that number to be freemen who actually have some weapons and a bit of training, who might be induced to accompany the knight, if they:
1) like the knight,
2) hate the bandits (personal grudge),
3) are promised a reward or loot, and/or
4) are paid as 'mercenaries'.
Also, I would allow Folk Lore and Orate rolls to help, but like said, trying to recruit peasants (even freemen) should be the last resort. Lean on your PK buddies first.



I'm sorry for bombarding you with so many questions but you seem like you know a lot. Any advice would be well appreciated.

Well, thanks. I like reading history (but I am not a professional, mind you!) and I have GMed Pendragon for quite some time, so I am quite familiar with its rules and the world. And being nosy enough to offer my opinions on stuff at the drop of the hap. So I try to help where I can. :)

The peasant levy of 4th edition was set at 5d20 able-bodied men per manor, which is OK enough, IMHO. Finally, I might allow like 10% of that number to be freemen who actually have some weapons and a bit of training, who might be induced to accompany the knight, if they:
1) like the knight,
2) hate the bandits (personal grudge),
3) are promised a reward or loot, and/or
4) are paid as 'mercenaries'.
Also, I would allow Folk Lore and Orate rolls to help, but like said, trying to recruit peasants (even freemen) should be the last resort. Lean on your PK buddies first.


I like number 4 the most of these ideas. In the simplest case it explains where all those mercs you can hire come from: they are freemen with some skill and arms that hire themselves out when times are rough but otherwise prefer the life of craftsmen et al.

Hmm. The easiest solution might be to put them on the same level, same as with the foot soldiers / warriors above, and just link the leader to the correct group: mercenaries turning to banditry are led by a knight, whereas the warriors are led by a chieftain.

I like that a lot! It's simple and it makes a lot sense!


The peasant levy of 4th edition was set at 5d20 able-bodied men per manor, which is OK enough, IMHO. Finally, I might allow like 10% of that number to be freemen who actually have some weapons and a bit of training, who might be induced to accompany the knight, if they:
1) like the knight,
2) hate the bandits (personal grudge),
3) are promised a reward or loot, and/or
4) are paid as 'mercenaries'.
Also, I would allow Folk Lore and Orate rolls to help, but like said, trying to recruit peasants (even freemen) should be the last resort. Lean on your PK buddies first.


I also like this idea too. I didn't know how many able-bodied men would be available for a battle and that sounds about right. But I think I agree with scarik and the responsibilities of a knight, so I'll probably tell players that this would be a last resort.

I totally agree with the first line and I should have thought of that sooner! It's like one of the few actual responsibility a knight has. I'm curious about where you're getting the two footmen from. I'm using book of the manor and I can't find where it says that each knight has 2 footmen, am I just missing it or is it in book of the estate?

That's a really good point on the mastiffs! I'm using a modified book of the manor for this game, so maybe I could give knights just a few mastiffs but if they can buy a kennel then maybe they'll be able to bring a dozen or so. I love it!

And when I look at the stats of bandits you're definitely right that a knight should be able to take on a dozen bandits while on horse back, especially if they bring their knight friends.

Thank you for the help!

2 Footman: As far as I can determine they appeared in the Book of the Entourage and in the Book of the Estate. The latter says that an estate holder brings for each 10 Libra of his estate: 1 knight, 2 footmen and 1 garrison infantryman. A basic manor is seen as 10 Librum.

As for the levy mentioned in the 4th edition. as far as I always understood it it was the King who could summon them to the field in times of war.

As far as I always understood it: A hue and cry is mainly to capture an outlaw, thief or criminal when they were caught in the act. So it will probably be used mainly for individual bandits or small groups. Larger groups tend to be not just bandits, but raiders instead.

So for dealing with bandits I would say that he must deal with them himself and maybe his footmen. (as others have mentioned this also). If the group is larger he will probably get the help from others, mostly his neighbours. Several knights could band together and deal with them easily. Calling in family or favors is also a good way to get help.

As for the levy mentioned in the 4th edition. as far as I always understood it it was the King who could summon them to the field in times of war.

That might be the historical background, but in 4th edition: "A knight with many manors can call upon a large levy!" Given that the whole Army section is written as to tell the player how many men he can call upon in a fight (In Family Knights: "One of the most important factors in the game is how many knights you can potentially call to your side in a crisis."), it would feel very odd from the phrasing and context that Levy would not be callable by the knight, but needs the King's order. I, and many others from the examples and campaign logs I have seen, have taken this to mean that the knight can call up his levy to help. This same section is repeated in 5.x editions, too.

The Feudal Army section (KAP 4, p. 256; KAP 5.2, p. 236) provides some more context:
"For local defense, the lord probably calls up the local levy as well, a mob of untrained peasants armed with farming tools."

Again, no mention of a king. Lord in this context refers to any landholding noble, vassal knight upwards. The emphasis on defense is why I would not allow the peasant levy to be used for anything else but defensive purposes: they will fight to protect their homes and families, but precious little else.


Re: mastiffs... I wouldn't give an ordinary knight a big pack of mastiffs. Maybe one, and then other chase dogs and hounds. If he is keeping a larger kennel, sure, then more. But it needs to be remembered that these are hunting dogs, not fighting dogs. They would excel more in keeping the bandits at check (snarling, barking pack of dogs is not something you want to get close to, even if the individual dog is not that terrifying) or chasing down runners (something that the knights would not do so well, in a forest terrain).

Re: mastiffs... I wouldn't give an ordinary knight a big pack of mastiffs. Maybe one, and then other chase dogs and hounds. If he is keeping a larger kennel, sure, then more. But it needs to be remembered that these are hunting dogs, not fighting dogs. They would excel more in keeping the bandits at check (snarling, barking pack of dogs is not something you want to get close to, even if the individual dog is not that terrifying) or chasing down runners (something that the knights would not do so well, in a forest terrain).

I wouldn't let a normal kennel have any mastiffs either, but my players are found of acquiring them so they get a fair bit of spotlight here. The typical kennel is common dogs while a large one bought as an upgrade has 1 special dog per upgrade level. And of course a PK can purchase a mastiff as a pet/companion much as he could an extra horse. It would roll survival like a horse and is not replaced unless the proper kennel size is met.

Yep, I'd be fine with that.

That might be the historical background, but in 4th edition: "A knight with many manors can call upon a large levy!" Given that the whole Army section is written as to tell the player how many men he can call upon in a fight (In Family Knights: "One of the most important factors in the game is how many knights you can potentially call to your side in a crisis."), it would feel very odd from the phrasing and context that Levy would not be callable by the knight, but needs the King's order. I, and many others from the examples and campaign logs I have seen, have taken this to mean that the knight can call up his levy to help. This same section is repeated in 5.x editions, too.

The Feudal Army section (KAP 4, p. 256; KAP 5.2, p. 236) provides some more context:
"For local defense, the lord probably calls up the local levy as well, a mob of untrained peasants armed with farming tools."

Again, no mention of a king. Lord in this context refers to any landholding noble, vassal knight upwards. The emphasis on defense is why I would not allow the peasant levy to be used for anything else but defensive purposes: they will fight to protect their homes and families, but precious little else.

True. And I must confes that I also give the knights the option to call upon their levy when the manor is threatened, but I heard that somewhere, no idea where. Of course in the anarchy phase there is no king, so then the landholding knight will be the one to call them to the field.

I would not allow them being used outside their own area as well, although you could rule different. In that case I would suggest that the effectiviness drops the further they are from home. also it will affect the harvest as these men also work the fields (you do take away the strongest and toughest men who would be crucial in the harvest).