In the King Arthur Pendragon 5th Edition (KAP5) rulebook, using the Family History character generation method, characters are born in 465 and the game starts in 485. The rulebook says the characters are 21 at this point. Is this Olde School Math? (like how Jesus dies on Friday, comes back on Sunday, and everyone says he was dead for three days instead of two) Or just an error?

The Great Pendragon Campaign starts in 485. KAP5 seems to indicate that you should run the starting scenario as the Knights' full year of 485 and they get Knighted at the end of the year. Is this right? Or should they already be Knights by the Battle of Mearcred Creek?

If a Knight is looking for a wife of equal standing in late 495/early 496, is it reasonable to give him a +5 on the chart? Or maybe even +10?

If a Knight manages to marry Countess Ellen in late 495/early 496, what would be the situation? I assume he would become the steward of Salisbury? But Robert would still be Earl. What would happen if Robert were to perish in childhood and the Knight and Countess Ellen were to have a son in the meantime? Would the son become Earl? Or would the Earldom proceed to Robert's first cousin or whoever is next in line?

Edited to clarify subject title

In the King Arthur Pendragon 5th Edition (KAP5) rulebook, using the Family History character generation method, characters are born in 465 and the game starts in 485. The rulebook says the characters are 21 at this point. Is this Olde School Math? (like how Jesus dies on Friday, comes back on Sunday, and everyone says he was dead for three days instead of two) Or just an error?

It's Olde School Math.

Are you asking who the legal heir is, or who would come to control the county? because those could be different answers. I think there would likely be war.

Some would trace family trees and reason out who had the best legal/customary claim. If the Earl had another son then he would inherit, else his brother would inherit or his sons, or else a cousin. But, and an important but, if the next in line is someone unknown and un-powerful in his own right then he is not going to find a lot of critical support in advancing his claim. Without a king, he would have to appeal to another local Earl or Duke for support and that lord would exact his price.

Locals could choose to support a local knight who advanced his own claim. Your PK can claim to rule in the name of the Countess who is a known quantity. The locals know her, and they know her people who they will have to deal with.

Then people would pick sides...a few times even. Who has the most knights? Who is on the scene? Who would make the best ruler? Who has the best claim? What am I being offered for my support, or what will happen to me if I don't provide it? Neighboring lords and the pesky Saxons will also choose sides.

In short, it will be the most entertaining several years of the campaign that I can think of for intrigue and knives in the dark and glorious battles and appealing for loyalty. Almost makes me want to kill the Earl and his son myself.

If a Knight manages to marry Countess Ellen in late 495/early 496, what would be the situation? I assume he would become the steward of Salisbury? But Robert would still be Earl. What would happen if Robert were to perish in childhood and the Knight and Countess Ellen were to have a son in the meantime? Would the son become Earl? Or would the Earldom proceed to Robert's first cousin or whoever is next in line?


Well, it's kinda tricky. In theory the King would appoint a steward for young Robert, who would eventually become the Earl. But, there is no king. So technically Robert can't officially become Earl until there is a King against to legitimize his inheritance.

If a Knight were to marry Countless Ellen, then he wouldn't not become steward, since there is no one to appoint him so (that pesky no king problem again). So the Countess would be the real power in the county, since she is the highest ranking official noble lest in the county. Her husband could have more than considerable influence on her decisions, but she is the one with title and position, not him.

If Robert were to perish in childhood, then the lands would go to whoever married Earl Rodererick's daughter, Lady Jenna (KAP5 page 55).

New children of the Countess would not enter into the line of succession, since they would not be children of the Earl. If the Earl had any illegitimate children, they would be in line.

If there were no children then things would get more difficult. Any one of a number of strong knights could try to make a claim to become the new Earl, including not only the Countess' husband, but officers and banneretts of the county and any relatives of the deceased Earl. Oh, and there would probably be a lot of suspicion cast on the aforementioned husband if Robert were to die off.

With no king the county could degenerate into a free for all, or simply be absorbed piecemeal into other counties. Someone who could get the backing of a powerful neighbor might be able to become the new Earl.Again, since there is no King, no of this would be "official" per say, not that it wouldn't be functionally the same.

At least until Arthur becomes King. It is mentioned in Mallory how Arthur restored lands that had been usurped from their rightful heirs. It is possible that there might be some relative of the Earl who could show up and have the county given to him by Arthur.

This kind of mess happened in my campaign, when one of my PCs coerced Ellen into marrying him and basically assumed leadership of Salisbury (after pulling off the impossible, breaking Cerdic's forces and annexing Hampshire). He didn't off Robert, though, so things went fairly smoothly (smoothly because he had the blessings of the Random Number God in battle, anyway).

Basically, in the Anarchy, your lands are what you can hold. If you've married Ellen and have the loyalty of the knights, then you are the de facto regent until Robert comes of age. If Robert and Jenna both suffer Unfortunate Accidents, then you're probably the strongest candidate for the next Earl, particularly if you have a son; however, you will need to deal both with ambitious bannerets beneath you and the Duke of Silchester or other rivals who want the county as part of their domain; by definition you are the most likely suspect for having bumped them off. (In the Anarchy, this is true even if your Honor is unimpeachable; nobody has to believe the accusation for it to count as a casus belli.)

It's even better if you've married Jenna and Robert has fallen prey to the wet stairwell. Then you're the husband and guardian of the Countess and can style yourself the Earl straightaway. Of course, you still have to deal with the problem of ambitious accusers.

This kind of mess happened in my campaign, when one of my PCs coerced Ellen into marrying him and basically assumed leadership of Salisbury (after pulling off the impossible, breaking Cerdic's forces and annexing Hampshire)

That's some trick! How did he manage to pull it off?

Anybody who could do that might just be able to rally the lords into driving out the other Saxons, or even make a bid for the High Kingship.

Thank you very much for the great answers.

I guess the reason I was thinking about inheriting Salisbury as long as Robert is gone was the whole thing in the book about getting manors from widows. I'm not sure I 100% understand why you'd get a manor from marrying a widow instead of the manor going to her husband's son/nephew/cousin.

Also, can anyone answer my other questions?



The Great Pendragon Campaign starts in 485. KAP5 seems to indicate that you should run the starting scenario as the Knights' full year of 485 and they get Knighted at the end of the year. Is this right? Or should they already be Knights by the Battle of Mearcred Creek?

If a Knight is looking for a wife of equal standing in late 495/early 496, is it reasonable to give him a +5 on the chart? Or maybe even +10?

Also, am I correct in assuming that if you use the full character generation system from the rulebook, that your grandfather is landless and your father only rules a manor after he marries your mother?

I guess the reason I was thinking about inheriting Salisbury as long as Robert is gone was the whole thing in the book about getting manors from widows. I'm not sure I 100% understand why you'd get a manor from marrying a widow instead of the manor going to her husband's son/nephew/cousin.


There is no husband's son, nephew or cousin.
Otherwise, she would not be an heiress.



The Great Pendragon Campaign starts in 485. KAP5 seems to indicate that you should run the starting scenario as the Knights' full year of 485 and they get Knighted at the end of the year. Is this right? Or should they already be Knights by the Battle of Mearcred Creek?



whichever you wish.

Thank you very much for the great answers.

I guess the reason I was thinking about inheriting Salisbury as long as Robert is gone was the whole thing in the book about getting manors from widows. I'm not sure I 100% understand why you'd get a manor from marrying a widow instead of the manor going to her husband's son/nephew/cousin.

Also, can anyone answer my other questions?

[quote author=dunlaing link=topic=564.msg4740#msg4740 date=1266541560]
The Great Pendragon Campaign starts in 485. KAP5 seems to indicate that you should run the starting scenario as the Knights' full year of 485 and they get Knighted at the end of the year. Is this right? Or should they already be Knights by the Battle of Mearcred Creek?

Just a quick heads up. Greg altered a few things in the GPC from the way they were in KAP5. One important chance is that in KAP5 the future Earl, Robert has already been born, but in the GPC that doesn't happen until several years later. It's worth checking over the GPC and the KAP5 book to look for any other surprises before they come up.

I got burned with the young Robert in 485 thing. I've ignored it since, but if anyone notices it when I announce his birth (again) I'll just say the older child died a couple years back. It happens to players knights all the time, so I don't think they will have a problem with it happening to the Earl.




If a Knight is looking for a wife of equal standing in late 495/early 496, is it reasonable to give him a +5 on the chart? Or maybe even +10?

Possibly. Or you could work out some roleplaying opportunities. If any of the major heiress are still around, players might set their sights on them.



Also, am I correct in assuming that if you use the full character generation system from the rulebook, that your grandfather is landless and your father only rules a manor after he marries your mother?


Not necessarily. Starting as a landed knight is a sort of perk for the starting characters. Other characters, are not usually so lucky. If a PC's grandfather is landless, his Father might be a landless (houshold) knight as well. Or he might have been granted land by the Earl in the past. Marriage is only one way to acquire more land. Knights can also be gifted/granted land for loyal service, and can acquire land by conquest (find someplace, take it, and then hold it in your lords name, or in the name of the liege lord who it originally belonged to).

Also, am I correct in assuming that if you use the full character generation system from the rulebook, that your grandfather is landless and your father only rules a manor after he marries your mother?


Not necessarily. Starting as a landed knight is a sort of perk for the starting characters. Other characters, are not usually so lucky. If a PC's grandfather is landless, his Father might be a landless (houshold) knight as well. Or he might have been granted land by the Earl in the past. Marriage is only one way to acquire more land. Knights can also be gifted/granted land for loyal service, and can acquire land by conquest (find someplace, take it, and then hold it in your lords name, or in the name of the liege lord who it originally belonged to).


I meant specifically in the case of starting characters using the Family History chapter. When your father marries your mother, it says she has a holding, and you only start with one.