I have a player knight spending a bit extravagantly as part of his courting process to impress a lady. I was not going to include this expenditure as part of his Glory for excessive spending, but he suggests it could be. What do you think?

If he is throwing money around to make himself look generous and wealthy ("Look, baby, I am so rich that I don't even care about money any more"), yeah, that is excessive spending to a T, IMHO.

If he is showering her with expensive gifts like jewellery, then no.

For example, if he is serenading her with a backup chorus and a full orchestra all dressed in livery ordered specifically for the event, yeah, that is excessive spending.

It is expensive gifts, which is why I agree with Morien's interpretation

I agree with Morien, but I would give a check for his amor or other trait or passion, depending on his reasoning why the PK is spending so much money on the gifts.

I agree with Morien, but I would give a check for his amor or other trait or passion, depending on his reasoning why the PK is spending so much money on the gifts.

I think an Amor check would be appropriate, yes, but I wouldn't give Generous or anything like that. Especially since the description was that he is trying to impress the lady = motivated by Amor, pure and simple.

I would disagree (somewhat) with Morien and the others.

The Glory for "Conspicious Consumption" is for public spending.

If he is secretly giving the gifts, then no glory.

BUT if others know, like her family and such, then word would get out that Sir Moneybags is spending lots of money on Lady Amor, and that would be worthy of glory.

Right, I believe this is what Morien and I meant, but it was not set out as concisely as your posting. I appreciate people who can say what I mean, better than I can :)

He is in no way motivated by Amor, BTW. He likes her vast tracts of lands. He is a famous knight, she is three times widowed and in her late 40's

The Glory for "Conspicious Consumption" is for public spending.
BUT if others know, like her family and such, then word would get out that Sir Moneybags is spending lots of money on Lady Amor, and that would be worthy of glory.
First, Makofan, you are welcome.

A point that Morien made earlier I would bring up, namely the idea of "jewelry" not being worthy of glory.

Again, it is the public nature of the gift that matters, not what sort of gift.

Sir Moneybags gives Lady Rich Widow a pretty necklace worth 3L.
If it is a secret gift, then no glory. If a public one where people know he is the giver of the necklace, then Sir Moneybags gets 3 glory for Conspicious Consumption.

I guess my point is in the CONSUMPTION part of it. Also, I don't want to deal with minmaxing players trying to give gifts to one another and thus establish a Perpetual Glory Machine.

A knight giving generous alms = Outrageous Consumption.
A Baron kitting his household knights in matching uniforms = Outrageous Consumption.

But gifts given just to one particular person? I count that as a gift, not Outrageous Consumption. Yes, I admit that it is a GM call, and I can see a judgement the other way, too. It is not enough Glory to really bother me when it is not part of minmaxing. But it is a bit telling that all the examples in BotE are feasts and other events, with the exception of a donation to a religious order, and even there I would point out that the beneficiary is not a single person.

AH - ok - I can see where Morien is coming from.

I am lucky in that my players don't really min-max. They do stuff if it is good for roleplay and story. Sometimes it is a bit min-maxing, and sometimes it isn't.

I guess I would say that if Sir Moneybag's players is doing the gift giving *because* it will earn him extra glory, that sort of idea should be heavily discouraged. Give him half or quarter of the glory, AND have Lady Rich Widow curses him for trying to "buy her heart" and says that her land will be given to another.

My PKs are all members of the "Order of the Wandering Horn", as they are all hunters who love dealing with monsters. I had a player who reached RTK, and he gave everyone in the order matching cloaks which had the badge of the Order. The player had completely forgotten that he would get glory for doing it, so I gave him full glory. If he had been doing it primarily to earn the glory and not for the story, he would have received half to quarter of the glory.

But I do agree with Morien, min-maxing for glory should be discouraged.

For me motivation is a large part in how I would reward such things (and maybe all actions taken by PKs)
The examples:
1) Sir Moneybags giving a gift to Lady Rich Widow. Since it is not amor I would probably give a check for Selfish and/or Worldly (His focus are the huge tracts of land he is getting). If it is to increase his family's status and wealth a Love (Family) may be in order.

2) Sir RTK gives his friends matching cloaks and badges. I would give them all a check on their loyalty (Order). In this case I could give him also a check on his generous, as he is sharing his good fortune.

Do I give glory in these instances?
In the first one probably not. Its all part of the wooing of a lady and in the end there is a reward in glory (if he succeeds). Even if the motivation was amor I would probably not give any glory for just the gift.
In the second one I would probably be more tempted to reward him with the glory, although if they got/get glory for joining the order I would not. The reward again is the membership in itself. Although you could argue that the order is more visible and as such each member should then get more glory, not only the giftgiver. I would probably give the giftgiver more as everyone knows that he gave that to his fellows.

For me motivation is a large part in how I would reward such things (and maybe all actions taken by PKs)
The examples:
1) Sir Moneybags giving a gift to Lady Rich Widow. Since it is not amor I would probably give a check for Selfish and/or Worldly (His focus are the huge tracts of land he is getting). If it is to increase his family's status and wealth a Love (Family) may be in order.

2) Sir RTK gives his friends matching cloaks and badges. I would give them all a check on their loyalty (Order). In this case I could give him also a check on his generous, as he is sharing his good fortune.

Do I give glory in these instances?
In the first one probably not. Its all part of the wooing of a lady and in the end there is a reward in glory (if he succeeds). Even if the motivation was amor I would probably not give any glory for just the gift.
In the second one I would probably be more tempted to reward him with the glory, although if they got/get glory for joining the order I would not. The reward again is the membership in itself. Although you could argue that the order is more visible and as such each member should then get more glory, not only the giftgiver. I would probably give the giftgiver more as everyone knows that he gave that to his fellows.

Hmmm - I totally did NOT give the gift-giver checks in his generous! I will have to rectify that error at our next game.
The PKs receive no glory for joining the Order. It is a PC based order, and only has PKs as members.

Thanks to both Morien and Cornelius for the comments.