The trait system is working pretty well for me at present, but always looking to improve, I re-read the trait rules and could see that I may have underused some of them at certain points.

Most of them are pretty easy to give ticks for, but how do people deal with Modest/Proud and Trusting/Suspicious?

Most of my players are pretty modest by nature so when one of their PCs does something quite worthy they don't tend to make a big deal of it, thus I now give a tick for Modest when they don't make a big deal of it for a long time. What about Trusting/Suspicious though? I thought giving a roll for Suspicious whenever the PCs are told something that is, or may be, a lie to check if they can see through the deceit would be a good idea (somewhat like the Psychology skill from CoC) but that means having a high Suspicious is advantageous, whereas most knights tend to value Trustworthiness. Is that just the downside to being a knight?

Idea here.... Test their proud trait more. U know, let them go to court after some great event that they completed and have someone else take more than their fair share of the players glory. Then make them make a proud or modest roll. If their modest is 16+ they HAVE to make a roll, and if they make it then they let the liar take the credit. Bummer. Suspicious is easy. Anytime they are around foreigners ( in this case it can be Out of their home county, or logres, or whatever) who give them advice or help they have to make a suspicious roll because they distrust outsiders. Also dont forget that as with any trait, above a score 16 thay HAVE to roll. Its the price u pay to have exceptional traits. some gm's might not agree with rolling suspicious when dealing with foreigners, but i think its appropriate in the early periods until Arthur conquers andn foreigners become mor routine. just a few ideas. :)

Idea here.... Test their proud trait more. U know, let them go to court after some great event that they completed and have someone else take more than their fair share of the players glory. Then make them make a proud or modest roll. If their modest is 16+ they HAVE to make a roll, and if they make it then they let the liar take the credit. Bummer.


Is a truly brilliant idea. Thanks. I'll be using that for sure.

I guess with Suspicious what I'm saying is can it be used to detect a lie, or does the knight just think they are being lied to?

No, they are suspicious of the intent of the other, and\or of the information in the message. They might not beleive it, or do not put much stock in it, but they can, in my opinion, not detect a lie with it. If they have hugh suspicious traits, they will always assume the other is trying to let tehm play his game, or something like that. They will not follow his orders, or believe his messages unconditional, but will try to find out what the other has to gain. That is how I play it.

On the subject of detecting lies:
What skill or trait might be used, then? I realize it would be best to roleplay it out, but sometimes--such as when party members are actively plotting against each other--there's to much player knowledge involved to be able to make a fair call without metagaming.

On the subject of detecting lies:
What skill or trait might be used, then? I realize it would be best to roleplay it out, but sometimes--such as when party members are actively plotting against each other--there's to much player knowledge involved to be able to make a fair call without metagaming.


Perhaps no TRAIT roll at all, but a skill roll of intrigue might be most appropriate?

I'd roll against both suspicious AND intrigue (or manipulation for those that have it and want to use it). A success on intrigue means they see the lie and a success on suspicious would mean it's not apparent that they've detected a lie. That way a character with high truthfulness is likely to cringe, flinch or otherwise visibly show disdain for the liar.

On the subject of detecting lies:
What skill or trait might be used, then? I realize it would be best to roleplay it out, but sometimes--such as when party members are actively plotting against each other--there's to much player knowledge involved to be able to make a fair call without metagaming.


I do use Honest/Deceitful in this.

I prefer to use traits for social interactions, when called for. (It's sometimes easy to go overboard and rely on them too much.)

If you can use Modest v Pride to get someone who is being boastful to shut up, I don't consider it a stretch to use, say, Suspicious v the other person's Deceitful to see if a lie is believed. Or, for that matter, someone use Honest v someone else's Suspicion to convince them they are in fact telling the truth (when they are).

I have had a player oppose his Suspicious against another player's Honest, because he wanted to not accept the truth :)

So honest people are better at ferreting out falsehoods in others? Where does that leave the naive innocent?

So honest people are better at ferreting out falsehoods in others? Where does that leave the naive innocent?


I would use an honest or deceitful roll against the liar's Deceitful roll.

What Trait is naive innocent?

Honest. As in, naive right-off-the-turnip-cart shiny-as-a-whistle Sunday School farmboy, like I imagine Percival was, though I'm embarrassingly bereft of actual examples. The sort of person who's honest not as a moral stand, but because he just can't imagine doing something so naughty as tell a lie.

I always played up Percivale's naivete as a mix of extreme Trusting and Piety. Of course he was honest, too, but I could see him lying in some situations, in the way a child might.

Regardless, a trait of 16+ does not have a single interpretation. One person might have Honest 16 because he is implacably proud, and sees it as beneath himself to lie. Another might have Honest 16 because he is too stupid to realise that lying is sometimes convenient and safer. Another might have Honest 16+ because he believes with each lie, you die a little inside. Another might have Honest 16 because that's just the way he was raised, and he hasn't given it much thought.

Each player will have his own interpretation about why they character has a given trait - I think that's to be encouraged, rather than trying to say "this trait means this."

I always played up Percivale's naivete as a mix of extreme Trusting and Piety. Of course he was honest, too, but I could see him lying in some situations, in the way a child might.

Regardless, a trait of 16+ does not have a single interpretation. One person might have Honest 16 because he is implacably proud, and sees it as beneath himself to lie. Another might have Honest 16 because he is too stupid to realise that lying is sometimes convenient and safer. Another might have Honest 16+ because he believes with each lie, you die a little inside. Another might have Honest 16 because that's just the way he was raised, and he hasn't given it much thought.

Each player will have his own interpretation about why they character has a given trait - I think that's to be encouraged, rather than trying to say "this trait means this."


Correct. The Traits are not motivation, but the way someone acts. This is one of those circumstances where the dice sometimes take over despite the player's desires. Someone may say he is honest, and genuinely want to be honest, but their actions belie them.

Just a small point on a similar note. Is it perfectly ok to get a trait tick on both opposing traits in one adventure, eg Valorous and Cowardly? Or once one is ticked does it "lock out" that trait until the winter resolution rolls take place?

I've ruled the former, both traits can be ticked, with the Winter resolution rolls determining which one has the great impact on the knight, or whether they both cancel each other out.

Just a small point on a similar note. Is it perfectly ok to get a trait tick on both opposing traits in one adventure, eg Valorous and Cowardly?


Yes


I've ruled the former, both traits can be ticked, with the Winter resolution rolls determining which one has the great impact on the knight, or whether they both cancel each other out.

Totaly acceptable. :)

You can get checks on both sides.

Which is amusingly frustrating for that 16 Valour guy who has a check in it and then gets a cowardly check - because you know which direction that trait is going to go :)

You can get checks on both sides.

Which is amusingly frustrating for that 16 Valour guy who has a check in it and then gets a cowardly check - because you know which direction that trait is going to go :)


I did that once to a PC who had Modest 20/Proud 0. The player was really upset, but everyone was getting kind of tired of him going around telling everyone how modest he was. I kid you not, the player actually kept saying that all night long.

Thats frikkin hilarious!!!!!!!!!! :D

Haha, that is funny.