I was really happy with Nin, so I'd like to keep her in some form under these changes if possible. I assume there's nothing in her background that's incompatible with the new system or premise, just that she's been gone from home longer and has settled down and become part of this keep of ours, perhaps still as a bit of a wanderer but with strong ties. I'm looking at the Outranger as the most obvious one for her.

Yeah, I think you can keep the same character, and playing her as the Outranger makes a lot of sense. The one thing is that probably Dark Age is a bit easier if she and her people have a bit less overt magic. Less free size-changing and more small people with skillful woodcraft and enchantment that allows them to confuse and mislead (and maybe change sizes with preparation and special commitment to an enchantment).

What system were you using before you made the switch if I may ask? The original Pendragon? or is there another AW hack of it?

As Tatters notes, Fellowship was how we were setting it. Fellowship has a particular structure (originally built to emulate a Lord of the Rings style of story) where there's an Overlord and then a party of united PCs from a variety of different people's opposed to the Overlord. Some of its later books (it has three books you can buy atm) include alternatives to the Overlord: the Horizon (focused on exploration without a single big antagonist) and the Empire (focused on rebellion where the bad guys have already won and control most of the land where the game is played). Setting up a corrupt Uther as the Overlord in a Fellowship game works well, but Fellowship really wants characters with very distinct peoples and lots of high magic and various sorts of technology (e.g., the Dwarf has several explosive and gunpowder options). I had kind of forgotten Dark Age existed and was trying to get this game setup to fit within fellowship, but then realized it was drifting into generic fantasy and away from the Arthurian setup.

I'd say the actual Pendragon system is a bit too clunky to run well over PBP, but it offers a lot of helpful background. The GPC has some particularly useful footnotes and sidebars especially. I don't particularly care for the detailed date/location/name of important person breakdown (too much detail) but sidebars like what types of advisors Uther has at his court and notes on political and geographic intrigue are very helpful for understanding the types of issues people would have been dealing with. The "group of players opposing a corrupt king Uther from a central keep" for Dark Age is a modification of the setup for the default Pendragon campaign.

@Anarion I have never played Pendragon only heard about it but I assumed you were using it, so my mind was blowing thinking that it had all these mechanics before apocalypse world did?!!! I had assumed (and from your description correctly) that it was a much more trad game.

Yeah, I think you can keep the same character, and playing her as the Outranger makes a lot of sense. The one thing is that probably Dark Age is a bit easier if she and her people have a bit less overt magic. Less free size-changing and more small people with skillful woodcraft and enchantment that allows them to confuse and mislead (and maybe change sizes with preparation and special commitment to an enchantment).

Works for me. Are they still fay, or ... idk, just druidic people?

So we need to discuss our keep now, or where are we at?

<Snipped quote by Anarion>

Works for me. Are they still fay, or ... idk, just druidic people?

So we need to discuss our keep now, or where are we at?

They can still be a Fae people. I’d suggest defining them using one of the Dark Age People sheets (there are a couple in the playtest doc).

The stronghold is a group discussion. My suggestions are
-defends a wealthy province of farms and forests
-enemies: an unlawful crown seized by a tyrant (in your view). Raiders by land. Maybe a third.
-fortifications: I’d suggest a square stone keep on a Hill, seems iconic. No suggestions for other options.
-armory: mail coats and iron helmets, horses/lances/kite shields for at least 10 maybe 20. Swords.

The primary people of the hold are also a group discussion. I’d suggest
-they are all the subjects of your crown/dukedom
-a vassalage of least 300, with 40 warriors.
-looks and names. Here I’d break from history and say to make them diverse
-stats. My default would be rites +0, war +1, wealth +1. I’m not sure this is optimized though. There’s a variety of options for each, I might suggest looking at their patience through suffering, their cavalry, their loyalty, their craft or metalwork, and their rich land.

You can also each select a sheet (I believe outranger in your case Stveje) and start putting it in the character sheets, selecting your particular Rights and other choices for the character and making a secondary people if the character is from elsewhere originally.

Posted my preliminary draft of a sheet. A few notes:

* I assume I'm part of someone else's household. Is the household and the keep the same? I'm not sure how households work.

* I chose the right to "step out of your earthly life" because it seemed like it might be the best fit for her people's space/size-changing abilities. Maybe it's not so much changing their size or shape as stepping into another space or navigating the in-between worlds. If that makes sense.

* It says a staff is 3-harm, but that honestly sounds a bit high to me. I'm thinking like a regular wooden walking stick/staff.

* Do you only pick one "defined by" for a people, or can you pick more than one?

* I chose numbers for a small vassalage, but maybe they have fewer than 40 warriors? Maybe a bit less than 300 people, too. Like, 200 people maybe. Thoughts?

I talked with Tatters about Constance possessing Excalibur. Although she has it, it can't be drawn by her or anyone else at the keep. You'll need to quest to find a way to use it, or find the person who can use it (which may be Arthur). Constance is the one charged with making that selection and may grow into being the Lady of the Lake in the narrative.

* I assume I'm part of someone else's household. Is the household and the keep the same? I'm not sure how households work.

Yes. The stronghold has a lord (which I'm just going to start calling a duke unless somebody says they really want to have a petty king instead). You're part of that lord's household. If someone picks the keep liege (which is looking unlikely) that lord would be a PC, otherwise an NPC.

* I chose the right to "step out of your earthly life" because it seemed like it might be the best fit for her people's space/size-changing abilities. Maybe it's not so much changing their size or shape as stepping into another space or navigating the in-between worlds. If that makes sense.

It does. You have freedom with that Right to make a selection of what that travel you want, and if you miss the roll, I'll select an appropriate response for your destination. I like this direction for it.

* It says a staff is 3-harm, but that honestly sounds a bit high to me. I'm thinking like a regular wooden walking stick/staff.

You probably want to keep this. Mechanically, all the primary weapons are 3-harm because that means you're evenly matched with NPCs or monsters wielding similar weapons and wearing armor. You can still flavor it as a walking staff and the Outranger as especially skilled with it rather than merely strong-arming with a deadly weapon. Considering the outranger might be one of the people most likely to encounter dangerous creatures, I don't think you need to mechanically weaken yourself to flavor the character the way you want.

* Do you only pick one "defined by" for a people, or can you pick more than one?

You'd only pick one in this main category. It looks right on your sheet.

* I chose numbers for a small vassalage, but maybe they have fewer than 40 warriors? Maybe a bit less than 300 people, too. Like, 200 people maybe. Thoughts?

I don't think you want a vassalage, unless you intend that the halflings are actually structured with multiple families swearing formal oaths of fealty to a lord. What you probably want is something like a clan or an enclave to be Nin's People, representing her family, friends, and relatives who care about her personally, with the understanding that there are several such groups of halflings such that there are many hundreds of them total.

You probably want to keep this. Mechanically, all the primary weapons are 3-harm because that means you're evenly matched with NPCs or monsters wielding similar weapons and wearing armor. You can still flavor it as a walking staff and the Outranger as especially skilled with it rather than merely strong-arming with a deadly weapon. Considering the outranger might be one of the people most likely to encounter dangerous creatures, I don't think you need to mechanically weaken yourself to flavor the character the way you want.

That's a good point.

I don't think you want a vassalage, unless you intend that the halflings are actually structured with multiple families swearing formal oaths of fealty to a lord. What you probably want is something like a clan or an enclave to be Nin's People, representing her family, friends, and relatives who care about her personally, with the understanding that there are several such groups of halflings such that there are many hundreds of them total.

So ... the People I'm creating are the halflings as a whole, but the number only refers to a small part of them? That's confusing.

Or should I only create a People called "Nin's Family and Friends back home"? But then the whole Rites, War and Wealth seem like overkill, or idk.

You’re creating Nin’s people. Which might be something like a clan of 30 halflings or maybe a village of 50 or so. Populations are very small in this setting. There can be other halflings, many of whom are probably similar, but maybe a different village is more war-like and another is wealthier. You’re defining the particular characteristics of Nin’s group.

Hey, hi, hello. About time I stopped lurking in the Discord PMs and actually put something publicly here. Everything on the page is tentative and not final.

Okay, so, I originally was going to do something very different in Fellowship, based on a kid's book I wrote years ago called "Trent the Pragmatic Not-a-Knight; A Bedtime Story for Cynical Children", but that character interfered with what Thanquol wanted to do too much and I was more attached to their vision than my own.

Since then, though, an anthropologist I admired a lot died so I've been going back over their work. One bit that influenced me a lot, and that I'm coming back to here, is the fact that the errant knight mythology is a post-hoc way to localize the Middle Eastern "merchant adventurer" storytelling tradition, from which we even derive the word 'adventurer'. What's weird is that the "merchant adventurer" was explicitly a non-combatant, though, a change which makes the end result end up really similar to the archetypal ronin samurai story, and a lot of ronin stories could almost be considered errant knight stories told in reverse.

They're weirdly compatible, frankly, in a way that's been a lot of fun to work through. Bushido and chivalry, knights and samurai both being feudal-warrior-landed-gentry, there's a lot of overlap. And while samurai specifically are anachronistic to the Arthurian, they are contemporary to the time periods of their mythos - they both start as products of the 11th and 12th centuries.

Historically, as well, Roman coins from this time period were found in Japan, Korea and China. So, that's cool!

Then, in an uncharacteristic fit of better judgement, I thought a "ronin's" heir would better fit the story, and a group, than their parent would. It also shaves off a lot of the sharper edges of the concept, especially since it means I can focus on the part that interests me the most - where the concepts overlap and synthesize.

So. Hopefully this is actually a fun and interesting concept to play with. I know it sounds like it could be a bit of a joke, but I promise I don't intend to treat it as one.

So. Hopefully this is actually a fun and interesting concept to play with. I know it sounds like it could be a bit of a joke, but I promise I don't intend to treat it as one.

Indeed, and thanks for getting it up. I really appreciate the second generation character so that we get both the sense that this is home and the interesting approach to the question of chivalry and related martial codes.

I think we're just waiting on Thanqol to get an updated sheet done for his knight and then we should be good to start. You will each get to make a season move to start the game, which is how you tell us what you were up to right before this season started and what you have in plenty to start the campaign (whether that be some tangible bounty or some more intangible progress towards your growth).

You’re creating Nin’s people. Which might be something like a clan of 30 halflings or maybe a village of 50 or so. Populations are very small in this setting. There can be other halflings, many of whom are probably similar, but maybe a different village is more war-like and another is wealthier. You’re defining the particular characteristics of Nin’s group.

Alright, I went with village. Also, she now has a full name: Kenina Haig.

I'm still confused about Household. I see the others have made, like, their own little household within the keep? If that's the case, then I imagine Nin's household is just Nin herself, and that'd make her the head of the household. Does that work? Is that how I'm supposed to do this?

<Snipped quote by Count Numbers>

Indeed, and thanks for getting it up. I really appreciate the second generation character so that we get both the sense that this is home and the interesting approach to the question of chivalry and related martial codes.

I think we're just waiting on Thanqol to get an updated sheet done for his knight and then we should be good to start. You will each get to make a season move to start the game, which is how you tell us what you were up to right before this season started and what you have in plenty to start the campaign (whether that be some tangible bounty or some more intangible progress towards your growth).

It is done!

I have the right to own a trained warhorse and own a kite shield. My current horse is named Apricot. I wish I had the good sense to take some apricot seeds back to England with me. Fool.

I love this so much

Yes to Nin probably being the head of her own household. That's just how you flavor their living arrangements.

Thanqol, that looks very solid. I quite like the image of the powerful bear knight you've created, and I agree with Numbers that the horse is inspired.

Also, a reminder to both Thanqol and Numbers that enchanted items in Dark Age always come with a "maybe" attached to the enchanted bonus. That is, you always get the numerical stats, and they "might" protect you from some special harm or have some special affect on a foe. It is possible this will be denied by some other magical effect (and you'd be in a position in which your Right related to the item was denied) or that it will fail if you roll very poorly, although I will use this sparingly.

Last thing, take a look at my suggested Stronghold options a few posts back. I didn't completely fill them out, that's supposed to be a group choice, so if you have thoughts on it, please suggest them. If you don't care, I'll make some suggestions later today.

Expect an IC post this evening (US West Coast) or maybe tomorrow morning. Going out hiking now, so I won't be around for much of the day.

I'm happy with farms and forests, I'm happy with the enemy choices, and with the square stone keep on a hill. I'd vote for archer's overlooks and a palisade wall, but I'd also be happy to swap either for the "unusually rich treasury", or to trade both for stone outer walls and a well.

Likewise, crossbows if we take the archer overlook, I'd like the armor-piercing if we're taking on knights loyal to the king. No other preferences for the armory.

Posted a sheet for the stronghold and its people. All of this is still malleable if you'd like to change any of it and there are a couple TBD items. For Stveje, much of the terrain (including the stronghold name and surrounding features) comes from suggestions that Tatters brought up in Discord.

For bookkeeping, I think the closest season move for Tristran is hunting (archery practice not being all stable targets), so mark him as having a bounty of fur and a bounty of meat (which can be used for trading or given as offerings/sacrifices later).

For Nin, I think tending to her flock is a form of working the land. Mark xp for a right of the land itself and mark a bounty of food (perhaps goats milk cheeses if she prefers not to harm them)

Constance spent her season in rites and celebrations. Choose between an xp for rights of the old ways or of the other world as you prefer.

Robena's is already noted in the IC post.

Posted a sheet for the stronghold and its people. All of this is still malleable if you'd like to change any of it and there are a couple TBD items. For Stveje, much of the terrain (including the stronghold name and surrounding features) comes from suggestions that Tatters brought up in Discord.

For my own part, I'm okay discovering the rest through play or letting the others decide. For Nin and I, it seems more natural to discover the keep than to define it, at least most of it, if that makes sense.

A brief note for Numbers. Since you got the 7-9 result, you get just the imagery for your consultation with the spirits. I do have an opinion of what that imagery means, but I also might have created an image that could be interpreted multiple ways. For scene pacing in a PBP, if anyone gets the 10+ result for consult the other world, I'll just provide interpretive guidance rather than require multiple posts for back and forth questions (and if you want more info on a 10+, you can ask OOC or chat me on discord).

For the hunting party, here are the stats for the badger