On page 80 of the Book of Knights & Ladies, it gives the religious bonus for Christian, Neoplatonists as: +2 Hit Points, +1 Damage, +2 Healing Rate.

This seems a little too good, especially since +2 Healing Rate is the entire Cymric pagan bonus.

Shouldn't that be +1 Healing Rate? ???

Well spotted. I think you're right.

I tried to think of a witty comment to make about Neoplatonistism and about how a knight of such a persuasion deserved the bonus for this but sadly could'nt think of one.
Reading this thread though, inspires my next knight to be one with a bonus like that!

I've caught one or two other ones as well.

The Saracens get +3 Hit points, +1 Damage.

all other religions are just the imperfect emanations of neoplatonism, the platonic image of religions

yeah, I got nothing

I've caught one or two other ones as well.

The Saracens get +3 Hit points, +1 Damage.









Why is this wrong? I dont understand?

Compare it to, say, Arian Christianity, which gives +3 hp, +2 damage.

Why is this wrong? I dont understand?

Because all the religions in Pendragon have been balanced with each other. So either this is a typo, or the Saracens are supposed to get less of a bonus.

And there is the fact that the Saracen Relgious Bonus on page 428 of the GPC is +3 Hit Points, +2 Damage.

Unfortunately I've been running into a lot of little discrepancies along those line in the KAP 5 books. Especially in the armor values. I suspect that most are errors or typos, but I can't rule out the possibility that something has been changed, or that there is multiple "grades" or cuirboilli, or padding with helm (thicker padding or better coverage).

Most of it (like if cuirboilli stops 6 or 8 points, or if Saracens get +1 or +2 to damage) isn't really important, until it involves to a PC or significant NPC.

The religious bonuses aren't strictly balanced with each other, nor do I think are they intended to be. Some are clearly better than others.

The neoplatonist bonus does look like an anomaly, and might be supposed to be the same as the Saracen and Arian Christianity.

On page 80 of the Book of Knights & Ladies, it gives the religious bonus for Christian, Neoplatonists as: +2 Hit Points, +1 Damage, +2 Healing Rate.
This seems a little too good, especially since +2 Healing Rate is the entire Cymric pagan bonus.
Shouldn't that be +1 Healing Rate? ???


Thank you all for your discussion here.
My conclusion is that these foreign bonuses need some review, especially those Byzantine ones.
I would remove the +2 Healing from these guys

But in fact, at this moment, my conclusion is that the British Pagan bonus is too paltry.
Equality among the religions in the KAP context is approximate, but I want the mainstream characters (Cymric, other British) to have the simpler/better advantages. Paganism is not mainstream. http://gspendragon.com/pagans1.html
Nonetheless, I think that the British Pagan bonus is too little.
Maybe +4 Healing Bonus.

Nonetheless, I think that the British Pagan bonus is too little.
Maybe +4 Healing Bonus.

:o :o One of my players will want to have your baby.

IMO the +2 Healing rate is the strongest religious benefit out there.
Raising it to +4 would mean that Pagan characters would virtually never die from wounds unless they were killed outright, since their healing rate would be at least 6, making Chirugery unimportant.
Neither the Christian +6 hp, or the Saxon +1d6 damage is anywhere near as good.

I think you are right
I will continue to dwell upon it

--Greg





Nonetheless, I think that the British Pagan bonus is too little.
Maybe +4 Healing Bonus.

:o :o One of my players will want to have your baby.

IMO the +2 Healing rate is the strongest religious benefit out there.
Raising it to +4 would mean that Pagan characters would virtually never die from wounds unless they were killed outright, since their healing rate would be at least 6, making Chirugery unimportant.
Neither the Christian +6 hp, or the Saxon +1d6 damage is anywhere near as good.

How about a secondary bonus?

Like +2 Healing and a +2 more years (age 37) before needing to roll on the aging table?

That would give the Brit. Pagans something more, without completely eliminating the threat of delayed fatalities. It would match up with the fey longevity thing, too.

The +2 healing bonus is very situational.

In some groups, it is very weak - perhaps because the games are usually over before too much time has passed.
In other groups, it can be very powerful, just because the game uses time differently.

My own house rule is: pagans get +1 to heal rate, and +1 to the amount healed on each first aid roll.

This means that even if the game doesn't cover much time, pagans still get a useful benefit.

The +2 healing bonus is very situational.

We've always found it very powerful. Especially since KAP3 when the Chrigurery rules changed. When you got the Chriguery needed box checked, a high healing rate really makes a difference.




In some groups, it is very weak - perhaps because the games are usually over before too much time has passed.

In other groups, it can be very powerful, just because the game uses time differently.


If you are referring to how long it takes to heal up, then I see your point, but that's not what I consider to be the big benefit of a high healing rate. In my group most of the healing occurs after the adventure, when it usually don't matter how long it takes to heal.

The big perk of a high healing rate is when someone has the "Chirugery needed" box checked. If the Chirugeon fails the roll, the patient takes 1d6 damage that week, along with recovering his normal healing. A character with a 5 healing rate is almost assured of recovering hit points and surviving. A character with a more typical 2-3 healing rate is probably going to slowly worsen and will almost assuredly die unless the Chirugeon makes his rolls.

IMO, that is the real benefit of a high healing rate. Especially during the early years when armor protection is limited, and major wounds more common.




My own house rule is: pagans get +1 to heal rate, and +1 to the amount healed on each first aid roll.

This means that even if the game doesn't cover much time, pagans still get a useful benefit.


With us, it wasn't how many points you got back, but if you were going to survive long enough to uncheck the Chirugery needed box. Actual healing was assured, if you survived the treatment.

The big perk of a high healing rate is when someone has the "Chirugery needed" box checked. If the Chirugeon fails the roll, the patient takes 1d6 damage that week, along with recovering his normal healing. A character with a 5 healing rate is almost assured of recovering hit points and surviving. A character with a more typical 2-3 healing rate is probably going to slowly worsen and will almost assuredly die unless the Chirugeon makes his rolls.

But that is still situational. I expect that GMs who gloss over healing time will also tend to have chirurgerers with 16+ skill around pretty much whenever they are needed. Since the game doesn't give hard-and-fast rules about what skill level should be available, and many GMs, especially those used to nearly every other game, won't want players to die from chirurgery, they'll err on the side of having high skilled characters readily available.

But that is still situational. I expect that GMs who gloss over healing time will also tend to have chirurgerers with 16+ skill around pretty much whenever they are needed. Since the game doesn't give hard-and-fast rules about what skill level should be available, and many GMs, especially those used to nearly every other game, won't want players to die from chirurgery, they'll err on the side of having high skilled characters readily available.


You're probably right, and that's a shame.


Part of what makes Pendragon what it is, as opposed to the typical fantasy RPG is it's Medieval flavor. Combat is dangerous, and healing up afterwards is not a given. Having healers around with 16+ skill all the time sort of defeats the whole purpose of having the skill in the first place.

The various supplements that have come out over the years, including new one like the Book of the Manor and Book of Battle point to skills of 16+ being somewhat uncommon.

I suppose there are groups out there playing with Stewards having 16+ skill as well, and those groups are missing out on another aspect of the Middle Ages. Or groups who downplay the dynatic qualities of the game, running it in a "day by day" mode or simply glossing over the need to provide an heir.

That's all kind of sad. Make the game too easy and people can miss out on much that made knights heroic. Or what makes Arthurian knights so exceptional.