Re: Mechanical discussion

[Dunstan Tullison]

Than he would get 3 DoS instead of 4, so Dunstan could get away with 2 injuries instead a wound.

But I won't mind if he doesn't let me do that - Ignorantia juris non excusat

[Baelon Drakeson]

True... though this is a game, not law, so I think a bit more leeway is justified.

As for latin mottos, I prefer In Vino Veritas

[Athelstan]

In wine there is truth, well said :;
):

[Reader]

Than he would get 3 DoS instead of 4, so Dunstan could get away with 2 injuries instead a wound.

But I won't mind if he doesn't let me do that - Ignorantia juris non excusat

I will certainly allow this.

Scenario 1 is about all of us building some background, getting used to power levels and figuring out tactics/rules.

Retcon approved.

[Dunstan Tullison]

Much thanks:)

I know a wound would leave a nice memory on the fight, but in this case it's on simply not incorporating several bonus dices, would be a shame not to participate in a meele because of rules slight.

One of those injuries will leave a scar on Dunstan's cheek!
"
The Central Northeast (?) remembers!"

[Dunstan Tullison]

Reader,

Would the new Tullison banner house be a lordly or knightly house? I wrote knightly in a post since I think House Tullison isn't really that significant to have a lordly house as their own bannerman.

[Athelstan]

That really depends a lot in your interpretations of Banner House, Knightly House and Landed Knight.

[Jon Cobb]

Per the rules for creating a banner house (p. 109 of the GoT rulebook), you roll 5d6 for each resource, and the starting influence of the banner house can't be higher than that of their liege.

Per the Influence table on p. 100, the minimum Influence to be considered a (minor) lord is 21. So unless House Tullison's Influence is (or will be) higher than in the Chronicle, the odds are definitely on the side of any banner house they set up being limited to landed knight status (Influence 1-20).

Of course, this is just the starting Influence. It's possible to increase the banner house's Influence in play, so it should be possible to boost the house into minor lord territory in the near future.

[Baelon Drakeson]

Per the rules for creating a banner house (p. 109 of the GoT rulebook), you roll 5d6 for each resource, and the starting influence of the banner house can't be higher than that of their liege.

Per the Influence table on p. 100, the minimum Influence to be considered a (minor) lord is 21. So unless House Tullison's Influence is (or will be) higher than in the Chronicle, the odds are definitely on the side of any banner house they set up being limited to landed knight status (Influence 1-20).

Of course, this is just the starting Influence. It's possible to increase the banner house's Influence in play, so it should be possible to boost the house into minor lord territory in the near future.

I was assuming that the Tullison influence had been upped, as Dunstan has been rolling 5d6 for status tests, and Theomore 4d6... both of which would require the house to have 41+ influence.

[Athelstan]

So you are pretty much at the mercy of the dice regardless of what Dunstan promises then?

[Jon Cobb]

So you are pretty much at the mercy of the dice regardless of what Dunstan promises then?

Or Reader will simply set the new house's Infuence at a level he feels is appropriate.

[Athelstan]

Then I guess Dunstan needs to wait for the ruling of what "
kind"
of House it can be.

[Jon Cobb]

I was assuming that the Tullison influence had been upped, as Dunstan has been rolling 5d6 for status tests, and Theomore 4d6... both of which would require the house to have 41+ influence.

Unless, of course, this game is playing fast and loose with the correlation between the house creation rules and a character's Status...

[Dunstan Tullison]

We are good than, Tullison influence is high enough for the banner House to have influence over 21.

[Baelon Drakeson]

So you are pretty much at the mercy of the dice regardless of what Dunstan promises then?

No, there are other ways to quickly raise the influence... throwing a tourney or similar event, donating coin (which can then be converted into influence...) those are probably the quickest two options.

Looking at the math of it, it would be 5d6-5 (-5 for being in the riverlands), so the likelyhood of rolling 21+ is almost impossible. Thus for anything more than a landed knight, there would almost guaranteed need to be an additional investment.

[Theomore Tullison]

Also, one need to take into the consideration that chapter 6 does not directly differentiate between technical lord and technical landed knight. House Clegane, which is not a lordly house is mentioned as an example for 31-40 influence, and they use "
lord"
as a title even for 1-10 influence houses.

And a look into the canon, you'll find a fair amount of landed knights more powerful than many lords, and some lords much less powerful than many landed knights. Which does mean you could have a knightly house with a considerable influence score.

[Dunstan Tullison]

Ok, that makes much more sense to me.
I will delete the last post in the Baths thread, and wait for Reader to comment.

[Theomore Tullison]

Mechanical discussions aside, canon is not entirely clear on who can "
make a lord"


We know for example that Houses Merrywether and Connington were stripped of land and title by Aerys II, Robert restored at least some of their lands, though only gave back the title to the former. The crown also raises several people to lordship over existing places with extinct houses. Then there's the curious example of littlefinger raising Nestor Royce to "
Lord of the Gates of the Moon"
, clearly, the king can give and take lordly title, but can other lords? It requires no stretch of imagination that littlefinger managed to get royal stamp of approval on what he did, he could probably just do it and then write to King's Landing and get royal stamp of approval anyway. The main thing is that lordly title lets you administer the king's justice, which does imply that it's the king that ultimately appoints lordship, though odds are that the king is happy to rubber stamp such things, at least if the lord paramount of the region approves of the plan.

[Baelon Drakeson]

Also, one need to take into the consideration that chapter 6 does not directly differentiate between technical lord and technical landed knight.

Chapter 6 does not on it's own, but it sets a maximum status... which elsewhere in chapter 4 is associated with social positions.
On the other hand, in the chronicle starter, House Barnell only has 18 influence, and Lord Tomas only has status 3. Yet he is a lord, a bannerman to the Starks.

I suppose then, it is up to Reader... is this going to confer the Landed benefit or the Head of House benefit? Ultimately, that seems to be the difference between being a landed knight or a minor lord... though I have to say it seems odd for the two to exist separately. Unless the heir to a landed knight doesn't get the heir benefit... otherwise Landed is a single generation thing, which just seems odd. Further, if a landed knight's heir does get the heir benefit, they get a bonus to status tests and their landed parent does not. That seems odd as well.

Mechanical discussions aside, canon is not entirely clear on who can "
make a lord"

All the more reason to leave it to Reader to decide. Of course, getting it approved in the current political climate could be difficult, if that is what it takes.

[Theomore Tullison]

My take on it is that "
Landed"
implies a non-hereditary position, while "
head of house"
is a hereditary one, which then by extension allows for heir benefit. Thus head of house is not necessarily a knight.

Landed (and head of house and heir, too) is a rather crappy benefit because one does not need it to be a landed knight (or head of house or heir).

Always more fun with political complications IMO.

[Riackard]

Landed knights through history were just overseers of villages, important places, or a specific area, and while it was not "
Hereditary"
like being the lord of a house, it more than likely stayed within the knights family, but a landed knight can be stripped away in a moment by the noble house that owns the territory and employs him.

I think most "
landed knights"
in Westeros are extended family of a noble House that supervise the various properties, lands and settlements.

[Jon Cobb]

Also, one need to take into the consideration that chapter 6 does not directly differentiate between technical lord and technical landed knight.

Chapter 6 does not on it's own, but it sets a maximum status... which elsewhere in chapter 4 is associated with social positions.
On the other hand, in the chronicle starter, House Barnell only has 18 influence, and Lord Tomas only has status 3. Yet he is a lord, a bannerman to the Starks.

I suppose then, it is up to Reader... is this going to confer the Landed benefit or the Head of House benefit? Ultimately, that seems to be the difference between being a landed knight or a minor lord... though I have to say it seems odd for the two to exist separately. Unless the heir to a landed knight doesn't get the heir benefit... otherwise Landed is a single generation thing, which just seems odd. Further, if a landed knight's heir does get the heir benefit, they get a bonus to status tests and their landed parent does not. That seems odd as well.

I've never understood Landed and Head of House to have a direct relationship with one another or with a house of particular standing. By my reading, Landed is just a means to start a banner house by spending DP, and while the text does mention being a landed knight, it references the mechanics in Chapter 6 for founding the banner house, and these clearly allow you to start a house with higher Influence than a landed knight. So, Landed is a necessary for founding any sort of banner house by spending DP, but that's all it does. If the narrator allows a banner house to be founded in another fashion, you could skip Landed altogether.

Head of House, meanwhile, is a means of distinguishing a character as the recognized leader of a house, no matter the standing of the house and whether leadership is hereditary or not. If one is the head of a house, it would be normal to buy this benefit, but the text says you receive "
the full benefits for being head of your house"
, so I think it's certainly possible to be a ruling lord without this benefit as well.

Heir seems straightforward enough - it's a mechanical means of distinguishing the person who by blood or circumstance is likely to become the next Head of House.

Edit:
Tying all this together with the rules and tables in chapter 6, I could see it working as follows:
- When you found a banner house, Influence 20 or less typically means that you start out as a landed knight (per the table on p. 100). However, as has been pointed out, Westeros does have lordly houses with less influence than houses of landed knights, and landed knights with more influence than would typically be expected (e.g. the Cleganes). Therefore, it should be possible to be confirmed as a minor lord in your own right even if the banner house's Influence is 20 or less. Spending DP to get Head of House would be a good way of representing this.
- If the banner house starts with Influence 21 or greater, you begin as a minor lord in your own right, and do not need to buy Head of House to be recognized as such. But if you don't, there should be RP consequences, with NCs questioning your right to "
pit and gallows"
and generally not treating you as a proper peer. Once you buy Head of House, your position is secure and generally recognized by everyone but your personal enemies.
- If the banner house achieves lordly status when founded, and later drops in Influence to the status of a landed knight, the house doesn't actually become landed knights unless RP events indicate that the lord has been stripped of his rights (an example could be the lord dropping his Head of House benefit). Instead, the banner house just becomes very minor lords.
- If the banner house starts as landed knights, and then gains enough Influence to match a proper lord, they don't have to do anything unless they actually want to become real lords. If they do, buying Head of House would be a good way to symbolize the transition (and will probably require some RP to justify the purchase).

[Baelon Drakeson]

So, Landed is a necessary for founding any sort of banner house by spending DP, but that's all it does. If the narrator allows a banner house to be founded in another fashion, you could skip Landed altogether.

True, though I would say that if banner house is being created by Narrator fiat, the best way would be to simply give the PC the relevant benefit at no cost.

My take on it is that "
Landed"
implies a non-hereditary position, while "
head of house"
is a hereditary one, which then by extension allows for heir benefit.

Though this does not square with the canon. There are several examples of knightly houses that persist through generations, such as the House Clegane (founded by Gregor's grandather).
It is possible that those houses land inheritance was merely at the discretion of their lord, whereas a full noble house has rights to inheritance that their immediate lord cannot supersede.
That has always been my interpretation, but I don't really have much to back it up.

Thus head of house is not necessarily a knight.

Well that's certainly true. In many families (outside the north) the heirs would be knighted as a matter of course (whether or not they had earned it), but it is certainly not necessary... Lord Kytley is an example.

Landed (and head of house and heir, too) is a rather crappy benefit because one does not need it to be a landed knight (or head of house or heir).

Eh, no. The Maester benefit clearly states that one can be a maester without it, and grants a significant mechanical effect on it's own;
however being a maester does not confer much benefit. Head of House, Heir, and Landed do not include such text, and the benefit they provide is largely from the position, not the benefit itself. I strongly disagree with this. There is reason for a Maester to take the maester benefit later on down the road;
but once a character is landed, head of house, or heir there is no reason to take the benefit. Perhaps it can sometimes be given at no cost by Narrator fiat, but the benefit should be required to have the position.

EDIT:

Edit:
Tying all this together with the rules and tables in chapter 6, I could see it working as follows:

I could see it working like that, but I don't really like it. It adds a whole new dimension to the benefits that wasn't there before, and there's really no reason to go that far, especially in the middle of a game.

Instead, depending on the RP conditions, a character that becomes the head of a new banner house should get either Landed or Head of House, whichever is appropriate. If the banner house is being created as the result of a Power expenditure by a house, or by Narrator fiat, the character should get the benefit for free. As I stated above, the power of these benefits is in the position, not in the benefit itself. Of course, if the banner house is being 'paid for' by DP investment, the character has already 'paid for' the benefit. Which benefit they can invest in is going to depend on RP considerations. It should be thought of as a story reward - you don't reward a player by forcing them to make a DP investment.

If, down the road, RP conditions change and a knightly house is elevated, the character can simply exchange Landed for Head of House. Again, the difference is largely a RP difference and not a mechanical one, so why levy a mechanical cost? Other than the +2 on status tests (not really worth a DP investment for), the mechanics of the two are identical... being a lord vs. a knight doesn't actually give you any mechanical benefits... you still have to get people to do what you say in the same way, with the same chance of success or failure. It is an RP difference, so I don't see why a mechanical cost should be levied in addition to the RP cost.

If a lord is demoted, they should get Landed to replace Head of House, for similar reasons. If a landed knight is stripped of their lands, they should lose Landed with no refund, similar to if a Cohort dies.

[Theomore Tullison]

Though this does not square with the canon. There are several examples of knightly houses that persist through generations, such as the House Clegane (founded by Gregor's grandather).
It is possible that those houses land inheritance was merely at the discretion of their lord, whereas a full noble house has rights to inheritance that their immediate lord cannot supersede.
That has always been my interpretation, but I don't really have much to back it up.

Think of it this way:
Head of House=hereditary position, may well be a knightly/masterly house.
Landed=Sponsor handpicks you (or arranges for someone else to do so) to oversee some part of his domain. Would not be a lordly house.

Gregor Clegane would have the head of house benefit, because his father (or grandfather?) was given a domain for himself and his heirs. Norbert Royce is perhaps the best example of the difference, he was "
The Keeper of the Gates of the Moon"
which is not a hereditary position, then littlefinger makes it a hereditary position. Mechanically, that likely changes Norbert Royce's benefit from landed to head of house.

Or perhaps more succintly: Head of House means there is a permanent noble house, with heirs and all, though not necessarily with a lordly title to go with it. Landed is basically an appointed position, and the house such a character leads is not his own, but rather a part of his liege domain that he oversees in the name of the liege. A landed knight without the benefit would perhaps only be in charge of holdings that are mechanically included in the house of his liege.

Eh, no. The Maester benefit clearly states that one can be a maester without it, and grants a significant mechanical effect on it's own;
however being a maester does not confer much benefit. Head of House, Heir, and Landed do not include such text, and the benefit they provide is largely from the position, not the benefit itself. I strongly disagree with this. There is reason for a Maester to take the maester benefit later on down the road;
but once a character is landed, head of house, or heir there is no reason to take the benefit. Perhaps it can sometimes be given at no cost by Narrator fiat, but the benefit should be required to have the position.

I do recall Carriker stating that one need not have the head of house benefit to be the head of a house. Same as maester (before game of thrones edition came out etc.)

[Baelon Drakeson]

Think of it this way:
Head of House=hereditary position, may well be a knightly/masterly house.
Landed=Sponsor handpicks you (or arranges for someone else to do so) to oversee some part of his domain. Would not be a lordly house.

Gregor Clegane would have the head of house benefit, because his father (or grandfather?) was given a domain for himself and his heirs. Norbert Royce is perhaps the best example of the difference, he was "
The Keeper of the Gates of the Moon"
which is not a hereditary position, then littlefinger makes it a hereditary position. Mechanically, that likely changes Norbert Royce's benefit from landed to head of house.

Or perhaps more succintly: Head of House means there is a permanent noble house, with heirs and all, though not necessarily with a lordly title to go with it. Landed is basically an appointed position, and the house such a character leads is not his own, but rather a part of his liege domain that he oversees in the name of the liege. A landed knight without the benefit would perhaps only be in charge of holdings that are mechanically included in the house of his liege.

Being made a lord does not necessarily guarantee being granted lands (per awoiaf w/references to canon)... but if there are lands they are heritable. I think it is more likely that Landed Knights do not get guaranteed heritability, but it is probably typical for the knightly sons of landed knights to be granted their father's lands upon his death... but the lord could choose otherwise. In the Norbert Royce case, I'd say he was made a lord (by Littlefinger in Robin's name or by royal decree at Littlefinger's request) and thus in game mechanics terms changed benefits, and the heritability went with that... prior he was a landed knight, and had no guarantee that his sons would inherit his position... which is why it was a powerful enough bribe to get Norbert to back Littlefinger as Lord Protector of the Vale.

What Baelon is asking for in the IC thread is for House Tullison to go through any necessary RP hoops to make sure it is a proper Lordship with heritability guaranteed(insomuch as anything can be guaranteed with a war possibly about to break out), not just a Landed Knight position where it could be taken away anytime House Tullison felt like it.

I do recall Carriker stating that one need not have the head of house benefit to be the head of a house. Same as maester (before game of thrones edition came out etc.)

That timing validates my point. They specifically changed the text on Maester, but not on the others. The others are required for the position, but Maester is not required. I'll take up-to-date reprints over an unprinted comment anyday - assuming that GR is like other gaming companies, what gets put in the books is far better thought out/playtested than what is posted on a forum or sent in an email. Given how many problems there are with the book, I'd assume that not near enough thought/playtesting is put into forum posts and such. Their fine for resolving ambiguities in absence of a better source, but the GoT edition is a better source, so I'd say we should go by that.

[Sponsored content]