Traits seem to cause me grief every time I think I've settled on the correct way to implement them. After a while I find myself questioning my original thinking and changing it.

In a nutshell: I have full understanding of what traits are. I have a good understanding of the rules. I *don't* have a consistent ruling that I'm happy with.

My main question really boils down to: When is free will applicable and when should you roll? This arose in my mind as I was putting together my Feast Event outcomes. Most of these cover an event of somesort which in turn triggers a roll of somesort (eg More wine is served, Roll Temperate/Indulgent). Originally the outcomes read "Choose" not "Roll" but then I wondered if that's how it should be. When presented with something should the player roll or choose?

When do you consider something a test of character, and therefore worthy of a roll, or simply player choice? (Only when the player suggests the action rather that reacting to it?). Note: I force rolls on PKs with 16+ traits.

This is the latest I could find from Greg on the Forums re this subject;
The general rule is:
most of the time, no roll is necessary whatsoever
The knight does what he wants
He might have to make a roll if:
there is a significant chance he might fail
it is a special test of virtue

This makes me think I should change my "More wine is served, Roll Temperate/Indulgent" back to Choose. But then what of "A serving maid flirts with you and suggests meeting in the stables for fun and frolics". Is that again choice or a test of virtue (Chastity)?

In my view:
It should be choose (but roll for 16+ traits).
And a barmaid is not a 'test of virtue' unless she was a special glamour to test your worth to find the holy grail.
[Or is actually a queen you might want to conquer a kingdom for]

fg
Thijs

I generally let players suggest when they want to roll traits, although sometimes I will ask for trait rolls if the outcome could affect the plot directly.

Traits seem to cause me grief every time I think I've settled on the correct way to implement them. After a while I find myself questioning my original thinking and changing it.

In a nutshell: I have full understanding of what traits are. I have a good understanding of the rules. I *don't* have a consistent ruling that I'm happy with.

My main question really boils down to: When is free will applicable and when should you roll?


Simple rule: when the GM says so.
Guideline:
1. Is this a circumstance in which his characteristic may be displayed without provocation. That is, is this where someone can attempt to make a roll at all? (flirting in the Grail Castle is frowned on, for instance)

Game Play Note: If someone is a drunk, a horndog, a braggart, an etc. down the right side, or wants to be one, then almost any court scene is fine for them to
a. bring it up, as something they wish to do
b. have it offered to them
Most of the left-column virtues are passive, but GMs should remember to create challenges to them as often as the drunks end up puking on the floor.

2. A challenge is a test. It is expected to be very, very tough and for most people to fail. Nonetheless, it is a test and knight have no choice whether to participate or not.



This arose in my mind as I was putting together my Feast Event outcomes. Most of these cover an event of somesort which in turn triggers a roll of somesort (eg More wine is served, Roll Temperate/Indulgent). Originally the outcomes read "Choose" not "Roll" but then I wondered if that's how it should be. When presented with something should the player roll or choose?


I am a little bit confused on why it is an issue. Either one provokes the same mechanic.
"The Fairy Queen puts a goblet of wine in front of you that smells so good you have to swallow, try your Temperate or Indulgent is my command as GM."

The system is rigged you know, that if you have (for instance) a very high Indulgence you will usually end up Indulgent, unless you are lucky with dice.



When do you consider something a test of character, and therefore worthy of a roll, or simply player choice?

Game Master only can determine when it is required as a test.



(Only when the player suggests the action rather that reacting to it?). Note: I force rolls on PKs with 16+ traits.


Yes, that is correct, in ANY circumstance.
In circumstances where a virtue is tested then EVERYONE has to try it. They have to try the one that the GM determines, if he does.
"Confronted with the vast treasure, do you take some or not? make a Selfish roll for greed. No, not Generous here."
However, if the GM leaves a choice anyone in the 16 or more category must attempt a roll.




This is the latest I could find from Greg on the Forums re this subject;
The general rule is:
most of the time, no roll is necessary whatsoever
The knight does what he wants
He might have to make a roll if:
there is a significant chance he might fail
it is a special test of virtue


My above is an extrapolation on this



This makes me think I should change my "More wine is served, Roll Temperate/Indulgent" back to Choose. But then what of "A serving maid flirts with you and suggests meeting in the stables for fun and frolics". Is that again choice or a test of virtue (Chastity)?


Here is a rule of thumb: does it matter?
If this some Pagan Cassanova collecting notches, who cares? They go romp and he gets his check. No consequences, no care. (evil GM? Keep note of these, and when he comes back a few years later...)
Is this someone with a wife or amor at home to who he has pledged monogamy, or who he truly loves, then there are consequences. I'd make it a test, even if the player initiated it. How many movies have we seen where someone goes right to the edge but cannot go through with cheating...

If it matters, it is a test.
When you, GM, make a test for the players, make sure that it has consequences.
Otherwise it's not a test.

I usually let my players choose. If they are notable and some plot complication that affects that trait comes up, I let them roll with the usual consequences. After all, isn't having traits at 16+ worth something, if not only glory? Reputations can be obtained for these notable traits, so getting traits there, and keeping them there, are worth some problems. Above all, I still let the player decide, even after the roll, which course of action he/she wants to do. If it is against the dice, then he suffers consequences.

Essentially, it comes down to what you and your players want. By the rules, if it is a test, then it matters.

Bob

I'd underline Greg's rule of thumb: does it matter?
If the players are passing time at court or whatever, and one of them wants to be chaste, lustful, temperate, indulgent, whatever, I'd either:
* let them roll, and see what happens
* let them succeed and give them a check, if it seems trivial and something they often do
* if there are pcs or npcs present who I might reasonably expect to react to this, I make it a test.

Before play, when planning an adventure, I'll think of a couple of things that will encourage certain trait rolls. I might plan to introduce the classic maiden calling for mercy for her murderous lover, or an opportunity to be greedy and get some extra loot, or whatever. Some of these opportunities will be presented as choices, and some as tests that everyone must roll.

Then during play, I'll keep my eyes on what the players do at all times, and frequently ask them, "why did you do that? what is your knight feeling when you do that?" etc. They will often explain things in terms of traits, and I may give them a check then and there for it. Or I might point out, "You've been taking more than your share of loot a lot recently - shouldn't you have a Selfish check?"

Getting players to think in terms of traits like that also has the result that they bring them up and ask for rolls against them more often.

Before play, when planning an adventure, I'll think of a couple of things that will encourage certain trait rolls. I might plan to introduce the classic maiden calling for mercy for her murderous lover, or an opportunity to be greedy and get some extra loot, or whatever. Some of these opportunities will be presented as choices, and some as tests that everyone must roll.

Then during play, I'll keep my eyes on what the players do at all times, and frequently ask them, "why did you do that? what is your knight feeling when you do that?" etc. They will often explain things in terms of traits, and I may give them a check then and there for it. Or I might point out, "You've been taking more than your share of loot a lot recently - shouldn't you have a Selfish check?"

Getting players to think in terms of traits like that also has the result that they bring them up and ask for rolls against them more often.


I also do this. In addition, I specifically ask which skill they are working on. I use these to help plan for the year. When the skill, trait, or passion seems a little bit out of place, I also probe the reason why. I've had a whole adventure come about because of the player's choice.

Bob