My campaign turn an unexpected turn in mortality. One PC died in the battle of Netley Marsh. Another PC, playing the illegitimate son of his previous character, rolled horrible on the child survival table, and manged to wipe out all his siblings in one year, including the heir to the manor.

Considering the circumstances (Nanteleod killed, Saxon's pillaging Salisbury), I'm tempted to knight the 18 year old heirs to these manors so that they could help to defend Salisbury, and so that they can produce sons to continue the line (assuming that Salisbury someone withstands the Saxon onslaught that the PCs are expecting). Both characters are a bit short on the knightly skill requirements, but their combat skills exceed the knightly minimums.

Does this seem appropriate to others, considering the circumstances? I know Earl Robert gets knighted at this time, but he is a nobleman, and it is more common with the great lords of the realm.

Well, I'd say that if there's no-one else around to take up the rulership of the PC's previous lands then it might be reasonable, but my knowledge of chivalric tradition is a bit rusty. . . .

The Earl might knight them if there's a shortage of un-landed knights or if he has some debt to the families? Maybe he could do it expecting the younger knights to be extra-loyal to him?

18 is pretty mature anyway, so it's not like they're *children* but they'll probably not get as much respect as older knights.

Depending on the graveness of the situation - and yours sounds pretty grave - I'd do it. It may not be the norm but the earl needs knights and desperate times always call for desperate measures. Also, I'm inclined to bend the rules a little if it enhances player enjoyment; I'd much rather my players play characters they wanted to rather than sit around waiting for them to reach 21.

I agree with Pramalot and Xarlaxas. Such grave times are certainly good enough justification to do this. The Earl almost certainly does have a shortage of knights. I'd have an npc emphasise the unusual nature of the act, so the players realise they can't rely on it in the future.

My condolences to the player who lose all his children. It's horrible (though can be funny too in a gallows humour way) when that happens.
I did have one player who still had female children, who pretended that one of the girls died instead of the son, and raised that girl as boy to be knighted later...

I did have one player who still had female children, who pretended that one of the girls died instead of the son, and raised that girl as boy to be knighted later...


Something similar happened to me, the player realized there was a large family of daughters. When the family fled from England due to the tyranny of Vortigern, he decided that they (the family) would raise the first born daughter to be a future knight. When the family returned with Ambrosius, the daughter became a son. (The little gossip for years about the family not having a son, saith the old wives, eventually did reveal the entire switch.)

Bob

Depending on the graveness of the situation - and yours sounds pretty grave - I'd do it. It may not be the norm but the earl needs knights and desperate times always call for desperate measures. Also, I'm inclined to bend the rules a little if it enhances player enjoyment; I'd much rather my players play characters they wanted to rather than sit around waiting for them to reach 21.


I'd say, look no further than Arthur himself. Wasn't he the "Boy King", the beardless one?
Go for it!

Bob

This is the Anarchy period as well, no? There's not as many social rules about nobility and rulership at this time anyway. I'd say go for it.

Its fine. I believe that 21 years was a rough guideline. I am willing to bet that men wre knighted at younger ages with more regularity than we think.

Depending on the graveness of the situation - and yours sounds pretty grave - I'd do it.

It really isn't grave at all, but I'm not letting the PCs know that. It7s 509, Wessex is going to bleed Salisbury for triple tribute rather than invide and the appearance of Arthur is just a year away.

But I figure that knighting and marrying the PCs right away, so they have a chance of siring an heri will give the players a sense of desparation, and make the whole Boy KIng thing that much more dramatic.

As it turned out, all the PC squires exceeded the qualifications in combat skills, but they were a little short on the non-combat skills. Probably acceptable considiering the circumstances. Hopefully theyt can polish off thier other skills once the immediate threat has passed.

Assuming they survive all the battles in the Boy King Peroid.