What would be starting value Loyalty (Family) for Bastard sons? I assume 2D6 (similar 7th son)...

Since family knights can be the husband of your sister (so an in-law), I also assume that in-laws fall under Loyalty(family), but modified.. how large should that modifier be?
My guess -8 (so worse than a bastard/7th son, since it's cold blood), so 2D6-2 starting value...

fg,
Thijs

Interesting question. I hadn't even thought about it. For myself, I'd probably not given them a passion at all most of the time (and sometimes even HATE?). Still, the bastard could have a high Love Family to his mother, couldn't he? It would also be different if the bastard is born to a noblewoman and "acknowledged" by the father. In that case it could certainly be the same or almost the same (-1 or -2) as a legitimate son at the same son #.

I would like to hear what Greg thinks :)

Interesting question. I hadn't even thought about it. For myself, I'd probably not given them a passion at all most of the time (and sometimes even HATE?). Still, the bastard could have a high Love Family to his mother, couldn't he? It would also be different if the bastard is born to a noblewoman and "acknowledged" by the father. In that case it could certainly be the same or almost the same (-1 or -2) as a legitimate son at the same son #.

I would like to hear what Greg thinks :)


I indeed refer to acknowledged bastards, however since they stand no chance of inheritance their loyalty will always be lower than any natural son..

fg,
Thijs

I indeed refer to acknowledged bastards, however since they stand no chance of inheritance their loyalty will always be lower than any natural son..



That's not entirely true. Acknowledged bastards usually can inherit, through usually after any legitimate offspring. Hence the interest in Arthur's illegitimate offspring. If Arthur had recognized Morded (or Borre) then Mordred could has concievable inherited the Kingonm of Ligres, if things had turned out differently. Acknowledgement makes them legitimate, but still born out of wedlock.

I'd say for acknowledged bastards loyalty (isn't it Love (Family) or is that a 5E change?) would be the same as for their son number.

Historically, even if a illegitimate child didn't inherit, he usually was provided for in some way, perhaps with a position at the manor (Steward?) or with a knighthood and best wishes, depending on the parent's capabilities and goodwill.

I indeed refer to acknowledged bastards, however since they stand no chance of inheritance their loyalty will always be lower than any natural son..



That's not entirely true. Acknowledged bastards usually can inherit, through usually after any legitimate offspring.




Exactly,they inherit AFTER all the legimate sons, so he should have loyalty lower then legimate sons.. (You can be the first bastard, son nmr 7 will inherit before you).
Ofcourse I agree that by giving them good positions will increase loyalty to family.

fg,
Thijs

In Medieval Wales

In Medieval Wales, prior to its conquest by and incorporation in England, a "bastard" was defined solely as a child not acknowledged by his father. All children acknowledged by a father, whether born in or out of wedlock, had equal legal rights including the right to share in the father's inheritance.

I guess this would be up to GMs.

Actually, if one wants to think about the loyalty of base-born children vice a King's own breed, one need look not further than King Henry II. His base-born son stood by him to the end, even at the risk of alienating his (soon to be king) brother Richard while his (by then) favorite son, John, deserted him at the last. It is recorded that shortly before his death he said, "His legitimate children are the real bastards." He wasn't far from wrong.

For me, because there is no expectation of inheritance, I would say his Loyalty-family should be determined by a story come up with between the player and GM as to how he was treated.

Interesting question. I hadn't even thought about it. For myself, I'd probably not given them a passion at all most of the time (and sometimes even HATE?). Still, the bastard could have a high Love Family to his mother, couldn't he? It would also be different if the bastard is born to a noblewoman and "acknowledged" by the father. In that case it could certainly be the same or almost the same (-1 or -2) as a legitimate son at the same son #.

I would like to hear what Greg thinks :)

I indeed refer to acknowledged bastards, however since they stand no chance of inheritance their loyalty will always be lower than any natural son..


Not necessarily.
Stephen, Arbp of York, was a bastard and the only one of Henry II's sons to stand by him.

A strong case could be made that it would be stronger, since they have only the good will of the family to depend upon, not a legal standing.

-g

I know in earlier editions of pendragon Love (family) was modified by child number. If any negatives are incured that should probably remain the standard. I dont give negatives in my campaign. It was a different world in medieval britian, but I still must maintain that a parents Love for their child generally doesnt change with the times or even with child #. I know people will say im using modern-day standards, but I dont think a parents love for their child has changed much over the course of human history. Some parents seem to not have a maternal/paternal instinct and some over-do it. Then most people probably fall in the middle of those two. i would just roll the standard 4d6+1 and let the chips fall where they may. If a low result or a high result is the outcome then a story can be made FROM it. It can be a useful tool for generating background and plot. :)