Player Two already rolled and has a 3, so we're just waiting on Four now.

18:56, Tue 22 Sept: Player Two rolled 3 using 1d6 with rolls of 3.  Bonus Resource.

That leaves us here:

Defense: 22
Influence: 27
Lands: 27
Law: 30
Population: 32
Power: 29
Wealth: 34

Bonus Resources:
Player One: 4
Player Two: 3
Player Three: 4
Player Four: 4
Player Five: 6

We're at a solid starting spot in terms of resources, not supreme in any area, but also not terribly deficient. We have a good set of Bonus rolls which could help us in maybe a couple of areas depending on what folks want to play. Here's the spot where what people want to play comes into the picture.

Just to present some options:

• Defense: We have enough for a Hall. Another +8 gets us a Castle.
• Influence: Enough for a single heir. Another +3 gets us a Second Son/First Daughter. Getting into any higher of a Max Status category would be too much to dump in here (+14) to be worthwhile unless we're doing it for another reason like getting more heirs for PCs to play.
• Lands: We can get a decent array of features here with what we have, less if we want a community. It makes enough sense for a House of our stature.
• Law: -2 House Fortunes. A +1 gets us to -1, but probably not worth investing into unless Player Four rolls a 1 on the Bonus Resource roll - and even then there may be better ways for us to pick up another HF point.
• Population: +3 House Fortunes. This is the perfect sweet spot.
• Power: If we want a banner House and/or we have any Warfare oriented PCs, investment here is another good idea.
• Wealth: 34. This seems like a good amount to have that we wouldn't need to put too much more in here unless someone has a significant thing that they want or something really pushes us to the next level somehow.

Personally, I think we'd see the most return from Wealth & Power and possibly Influence.
This message was last edited by the player at 20:27, Thu 24 Sept 2020.

15:14, Today: Player Four rolled 4 using 1d6.  House increase.


Reading history now, house name I am fine with, house motto, not so much...but if i get out voted then I deal with it lol.

For house stats, remember when spending Land, that each realm we create can only hold 2 wealth holdings.  So if we pile all of our land points into one realm, then we may have an excess of wealth available (although there are ways to expand this some with the Out of Strife, Prosperity holdings).

I missed that, sorry mate!

I tend to find Wealth and Power the most useful, unless we're near a breakpoint with one of the others.  Wealth because there are so many cool things in the house supplement we're using, and power because it's both banners and actual military forces.

So personally I'd dump a 10 in one, and 8 in the other?

It doesn't seem like we'd have a castle honestly, so I'd ignore Defense.  It's the Riverlands after all!

My understanding is that we can have as many heirs and heiresses as we want, however only one would have a status higher than 2 if we retain our current influence. If we bump up to the next level, the head of house and the first and second heir would all move up one rung on the influence level. Other children would be unchanged. At least I think that's how it's intended to work?

Also, I'm good if we have a hall, and a bit of lawlessness on our lands seems appropriate based on our history.

Update on holdings from Out of Strife, Prosperity book:

Settlement Holdings require a population of some size in order to be built. Generally speaking, they require either a Community (Hamlet, Town or City) or Defensive Holding (Tower, Hall or Castle) in order to construct. A hamlet or tower may have one such Holding, a small town or hall may have two, a large town or castle may have four and there is no limit to how many larger communities or defensive holdings may have. These limits apply to all Settlement Wealth Holdings save where noted.

So, depending on how we develop our land and other holdings, we may have some options.

Currently reading through the OoS,P and Core rulebook.

A third option that I am open to would be a female heir [10], and either lesser sisters or male or female cousins [5]

Any bastards of the house could be either free in terms of influence, or [5] if they've been incorporated into the life of the house as members of the family [status 3].

This would give you a wider range of options, as a female heir and three relatives of lesser standing could be afforded without further investing in Influence.

I suggest this noting that player 5 have expressed an interest in a Female Heir, and pretty much everyone has expressed interest in either a member of the house or a knight in service to the house [whether retainer or bannerman].

I'm leaning towards an NPC head of house given some reservations that have been expressed, but such a character will have one foot in the proverbial grave at the story's beginning and PC's will have increasing control and influence as the story progresses.

In reply to The Many Faced God (msg # 41):

Not sure I really see the difference between a pc heir that is about to be head of house due to one foot in the grave of the lord...and a pc lord to begin with.  I'd think issues with one would be the same with the other.

However, as I mentioned in the RTJ, I do have many other concepts.

That solves my biggest concern, as it gives us time to get to know one another before the actual inheritance happens.  And, truthfully, because the heir would be a woman, things would be a touch less rigid in structure than they might otherwise be.  So as the one raising the concern about a PC head of house to start with, it seems a fair solution to me mate, so go for it!  And having a female heir would certainly make for some fun stories.  Basically turns the whole you're new thing up to eleven because she's a woman too.


Assuming we run with that, what's everyone else thinking about in terms of concepts?

And it's also worth remembering that some things from the supplement specifically require you not to have settlements.  It's a welcome change from the core rules, where you always wanted a market + mine, and thus, a settlement.

GM: Well done on the history.  It was a good read and does open up some ideas.

From reading the history though it, it does sound like we'd have two domains, the Bracken lands gifted to the family, and the old pirate hideout.

So, our Lands score should be divided between these two options.


Some initial thoughts from Defense to Land

Defense: Hall

Influence: Female heir, couple of other (per gm notes)

Land:
Plains, Stream, Grassland 5+1+1
Hills, River, Hamlet 7+3+10  (this is 27 points...if we want something else, we'd have to add from our rolls)

The Hills domain would have been the old pirate base...a hall with a small hamlet next to the river for access. The plains lands would be those gifted to the family on founding of the house by House Bracken.  We aren't large, we don't have a massive town/city, we have an open area for future growth...  Thoughts?

EDIT: Although our lands don't quite match up to our population.  Population example reads as a small town or multiple hamlets...
This message was last edited by the player at 23:34, Thu 24 Sept 2020.

I'm fine with that.  And it simply means that we have most of our people spread out in small farms, or little fishing villages of a few families.

The flavor text often fails to line up with the numbers, so lets focus on the numbers for now.

As Player One has suggested, Population should probably be read as relating to minor holdings, and outlying farmsteads rather than larger hamlets or towns.

More abstractly it might relate to people over whom you can exercise your feudal rights - so a large city represents a huge land investment, but the house that owns it might have a small population score [say 10] because the people of that city owe no real obligations to their lord due to city charters etc. This certainly isn't how the book outlines it, but it does make more sense of small population scores for large communities.

So before we dive into Power and Wealth then, is anyone looking to play a banner?  Two, I think you mentioned you were?  I'm strongly considering it myself, and wanted to see if anyone else was before we started looking at how to break down points.

I think 20 pts is a bit much to spend. Even if we put 10 pts into power from what we rolled, we'd get 3-4 basic units to defend 2 domains. It is not a wise decision.

Just using a garrison as an example.
Green Garrison - 3
Trained Garrison - 5

We could have 6 green, untrained garrison units, or 3 trained garrison units for the points we'd have left over.  No warship or raiders to harken back to our pirate past, no infantry or cavalry for offensive options...

A couple things to note:

One, generally speaking, less is more in GoT.  You're likely only issuing 5, maybe 7 orders a round (Commander's warfare + one for each subcommander) or so, and you can issue the same unit orders more than once.  So to have a bunch of units means that you're wasting units as you likely won't have enough orders.  Plus, a hall can only hold two units, so keep that in mind if we're ever forced on the defensive.

Second, if need be, we can always raise peasant levies, which, actually make up the bulk of most armies in the setting.  It's seriously just, here's a thick shirt and a spear.  Stick them with the pointy end and try not to die.

Third, by having a banner, they in turn have a Power score, and would be bringing units if we need them, so it's not as if those points suddenly go poof!

So even if we have 19 leftover, we could end up with something like this:

Trained Archers (6)
Trained Infantry (7)
Green Cavalry (6)

It's a solid force on offense or defense, and we can always spend two points of power later to make the cavalry trained.  That and, we'd have the support of our banner if we ever went to war.

We're not in a castle, so to me, less is more.  But again, I freely admit my bias here!

And no, we don't have warships.  Yet.  But that's something that our Lord could certainly build towards!  Of course we'd need to make a point of saying that we have an actual port (which there's a holding for).  And Ports actually has the Drydock improvement.  In fact, there's also an estate holding for Timber, with a Shipyards improvement (which reduces the Power cost of ships).  Point being, if we wanted to become a major maritime power, we could certainly set ourselves up for that in the future.

That said, we certainly don't have to have a banner?  But I see the advantage being that we'd effectively control more territory, have a bit more weight to throw around at court, and not really lose anything in terms of actual Power, as the house would likely be close to that 20 themselves.  Likely.  Probably in the high teens.
This message was last edited by the player at 15:49, Fri 25 Sept 2020.

Put it to a vote: No

Points could be better utilized.

But if everyone else is ok with it, then that is fine.

I, personally, would prefer a banner house. It has nothing to do with numbers and everything to do with it adding another interesting element to the story. Previously successful and enjoyable games under this system that I've played in have had banner houses.

In terms of actual power, I feel like it usually produces power about equivalent to the power spent to create it. Theoretically it's another house to aid if necessary, but from prior experience...that's not a problem. PC house and PC bannerhouse are almost always extremely closely linked.

I am working on some numbers now that should allow an easy compromise of adding the Banner House.  Although I have no issue with a PC ran banner house, the actual rules state that banner houses are narrator controlled houses.  At the end of the day, we should be able to make it work so we are all able to enjoy things.  Just give me an hour or so and I will post some numbers for everyone perusal.

Never fear my friend, I've already asked the powers that be, as my concept was a knight bannerette in service to the house.  Provided I take sponsor and landed, it would be alright.

That said, we obviously have to agree first, so I'm looking forward to seeing your proposal!

Defense: 22
Influence: 27
Lands: 27+3=30
Law: 30
Population: 32
Power: 29+10=39
Wealth: 34+8=42

Bonus Resources:
Player One: 4 Wealth
Player Two: 3 Lands
Player Three: 4 Wealth
Player Four: 4 Power
Player Five: 6 Power

Land: 30
Land:
Plains, Stream, Grassland, Light Woods 5+1+1+3
Hills, River, Hamlet 7+3+10

Power: 39
Banner House - 20
1x Trained Garrison - 5
1x Green Garrison - 3
1x Trained Warship - 8 (7+3-2(shipyards))
Leaves 3 points open. We could upgrade the second garrison and have 1 power left over as well.
---The house should have at least one signature unit based on its history.  That isn't easy to do with a banner house, but it is semi-manageable.

Wealth - spending a lot to get flavor of shipbuilding...2 wealth left over.
Trading Inn + Growth 15 wealth
--Port 10 Wealth
Timber+Lumber mill + shipyards 15 Wealth

---I don't personally like this all that much, but it gives the flavor of shipbuilding and warships while allowing us to have a banner house.

This would also be conditional on the banner house focusing a bit more on land units with what power it has.
This message was last edited by the player at 17:20, Fri 25 Sept 2020.

I'm going to put in another vote for a banner house. I think they make a positive narrative contribution to our House's story overall; I like the idea of having a vassal - and with narrator permission it might open up more opportunities for PCs.

---

Since it looks like we're leaning female heir, in the Riverlands that means that she would have no full male siblings (at least, that still live). As such, since I want to play a member of the main house, I'm leaning towards Uncle as my concept - at least in terms of where I fit into the family tree.

Question, can the Trident and the Forks actually support true warships?  I just always assumed that as a river, vessels were much smaller and lighter to allow for portage if need be, and with a shallow draft for when the river is low.

I'm digging through source material, but there's not much that I can find.  Not yet at least.

And an uncle sounds great!  Will add another interesting wrinkle to the whole house dynamic, that's for sure!

In reply to Player One (msg # 56):

By the rules, yes.  All you have to have is a River.  It doesn't say, or assume, that a river based warship is as large as an ocean going warship.  It is a ship designed for use on the waters it is built and can be used to carry other troops.

From the rules perspective, as Player Four suggested, yes, we can have warships.

Even from a narrative one, while I can't find references to the Red Fork specifically, Lord Wyman Manderly does suggest in ADWD that he has a number of warships (proper ocean faring ones) hidden away up the White Knife.  Given that the Red Fork is a major river in the Riverlands, I think it is possible we could have Warships of whatever sort there - but most likely river galleys. I'd wager that perhaps compared to other rivers, it is possible that they are more substantial river galleys that could at need be utilized as coast hugging warships.

That is not correct unless things were different hundreds of years before the books.  Eleanor Mooton is the Heir to House Mooton and has 2 younger brothers.

from westeros.org

Eleanor Mooton is the eldest daughter of Lord William Mooton of Maidenpool, and his heir.She has at least two brothers and an unknown number of sisters.

Presumably the are not full brothers, though apparently they could be.

https://awoiaf.westeros.org/in.../Customs#Inheritance