Here we will decide what kind of story we want to tell in this game. We have this snippet of setting, but what interests you in it and what types of characters would you want to play in it?

Also, let us know what your lines and veils are.

---

We all have our limits and boundaries. Lines and veils are different ways to handle those boundaries in play.

A line is, well, a line — a hard limit, something we do not want to cross. Lines represent places we don't want to go in roleplaying.

"There is no torture in the events in our game. We don't do it, NPCs don't do it to us or to each other. Whether it happens elsewhere in the setting is not an issue in terms of enjoying play."

A veil is a "pan away" or "fade to black" moment. When we veil something, we're making it a part of the story, but keeping it out of the spotlight. Think of it as a way to still deal with certain themes while avoiding having to describe them in graphic detail.

"Torture does happen in the game world and may happen in our game in some way or another. But if and when it does, we do not role-play it directly or depict it verbally. Everyone is trusted to play their characters as reacting to it appropriately without us having to experience it vicariously."

---

For example: I don't immediately think I have any hard lines at the moment (but I might encounter some later and add it) but my veils are graphic violence/gore and graphic erotic scenes. They can happen 'off screen' or implied, but not 'visible' so to say. I don't want descriptions of graphic gore or graphic sex-scenes.
This message was last edited by the GM at 11:59, Mon 12 July 2021.

In terms of the story, I think it depends a bit on what everyone else is looking for, especially in terms of the balance between the different aspects of any given game.

What I'm really looking for is everyone to be on the same page about the kind of game we're running and what we're looking to get out of it - I hate it when you have one player with a bunch of backstory who wants to focus on character development, and another who is mainly interested in combat and action, because both have entirely legitimate desires but will absolutely get in each other's way and frustrate each other equally.

My personal preference would be a character driven narrative with realistic portrayals of people from the time, where the players are responsible for building their narrative arcs over the various quests that the GM sets for us. I tend to prefer keeping fantasy as low and realistic as possible, and look for historical verisimilitude and realistic, flawed characters as much as possible.

That being said, if other people want other things, I'm happy to adapt, but I just need to be absolutely clear as to what I'm adapting to, otherwise I will spend a long time banging my head against a metaphorical wall in frustration.


In terms of Lines and Veils, I'd probably firstly note that the two things already cited for Veils (graphic sex and graphic violence) would have to occur off screen anyway if this is to be a Mature rated game rather than an Adult one.

Unless there's a massive clamour to move up to Adult by the other players, I'm happy to keep it as Mature at the moment.

In terms of personal Lines, I'm relatively open to period appropriate things using the Artistic Merit caveat - 1460s France was a very different time to now, and if the game setting is intended to be a more realistic and grounded take on a fantasy setting, then one could anticipate encountering prejudice, intolerence, crime, murder, torture etc, and if taken seriously then it would serve as a good way of serving the overall thrust of the game.

That being said, we are in a Mature setting, and even if we were to move up to Adult, I also would feel uncomfortable playing as or alongside protagonists who are virulently racist, mysogynist, gratuitously criminal, murderous or enthusiastic towards torture. As such, I'd probably put some of those more extreme examples under Veils.

I feel this is a great quote to frame my own goals as well.  It aligns very closely with my own thoughts, and as such please forgive me if I borrow it.

With the benefit of somewhat familiar locations, cultures, timelines, histories, etc, I feel that there is great value in retaining most of the material, within reason, while keeping realism at the fore and the fantasy "low". Low in that I would prefer it be be mysterious, believable, potentially terrifying. Something that would have suitable impact to the 15th century European mind.

In regards to Lines and Veils, the RPoL Terms of Service align well with my preferences. I am not one to shy away from the sometimes ugly reality of human nature or our shared past, but I am also not one to desire a spotlight on them either.

I could list all the minutiae, but I think everyone present knows the sorts of things I am referring to. I am comfortable with them being included, indeed in some ways I think that it is important that they are not omitted. But I would prefer we keep it tasteful if or when they are.

To circle back to the original quote, I am most interested in telling the story, and in watching the characters grow, change, adapt and "live" in the setting while reacting organically and believably to whatever befalls them. I abhor the "Mary Sue".

I enjoy the inclusion of normal human motivations, belonging, fear, anxiety, comfort, jealousy, pride, love, infatuation, curiosity, joy, faith, loyalty, etc.

I like the idea of low fantasy. Inexplicable things happen, and they are just that. Inexplicable. Some might see a curse, or pixies or demons or divine judgement. Others might think it’s just illness or bad luck. Or things are unlikely yet explainable.

“The old lady was mad at you for taking her cow away as taxes. She yelled something at me in her strange farmer dialect, and now I can’t be away from the toilet for more than an hour before having to go again!”

I’d say let’s define magic, but that might be just it. It might not be definable. What we could say is that, if it exists, it’s not something the players can do. At least not from the start. What do you think?

Personally I like the idea of each magical "experience" being a unique story in itself.

The farmer that realizes that he has the ability to control the weather. He tells no one, and convinces himself that each time he calls upon the weather to change that he must make a fitting sacrifice in turn, killing a sheep, tossing a coin into the river, etc.

The minor noblewoman who has convinced herself that she is a witch, but who actually possesses no power what so ever. Unfortunately her cook does actually consort with a familiar spirit and is terrified of getting caught up in her ladies drama.

The merchant who purchased a collection of souvenirs while on pilgrimage, including a transcript in Aramaic on crumbling parchment that guarantees interesting and reoccurring dreams when read before evening prayers. Dreams in which he has half remembered conversations lingering on his mind come morning.

All three are "magic", all three might react in different ways. One of them might  find real benefit and power in trying to find out more, another might be so ashamed and scared that they try to forget about it all together.

But each of their stories in personal and shapes their world view.

Feel free to pinch as much as you want! I think there's a good Tom Lehrer song on the subject, but I'm glad I can do something useful!

In terms of magic, I think we're generally on the right track with our current discussions. I think I'd make the following limitations on our portrayal of magic, but I'm happy to discuss them:

A) Magic is rarely 'vulgar' - nothing is so obviously supernatural that it couldn't be explained away circumstantially as luck, fortune, old wives tales etc. As such, the existence of magic is easily denied by the majority of the population/authorities after the fact, and there's a general lack of surity about whether it exists in the slightest.

B) Magic and magical beings are rarely if ever strong enough to afford their users sufficient power to effectively brute force overthrow an existing order - magic can't grant immortality or complete invulnerability, nor strength to the point where someone could tear down a castle wall - the same goes for individual magic creatures. That doesn't mean you can't achieve the same effect by more subtle application, but you shouldn't be in a situation where you can treat the local military force with impunity.

C) Use of magic by humans (and indeed others) should be rare, taboo, require a sacrifice to use, and should not be anything you could exclusively rely upon - it shouldn't be a superpower, it should be dangerous and unreliable to use, and it should be something where you sacrifice something (preferably poetic) to be able to use it, if you can at all.

D) Magic should be mysterious, unclassifiable, and largely uncontrollable - linking to my previous point a little, magic should be something which is utterly alien and almost entirely unknowable, and any attempt to classify or put it into neat boxes should be avoided. It's weird, utterly incomprehensible, and the best most humans can likely do is realise that X type of wood might repel Z type of spook, and even that might only work when the Moon is full.


I think that would naturally encapsulate most of the comments made already, and nicely set upa good couple of rules for how we might play. Also, as an effective E, I might also suggest that healing magic is very limited and clunky, because I hate the comparative impunity that 'I've got healing potions' can bring to play.

Anyhow, happy to discuss these further!

Hey everyone!

I feel like a lot of the ideas that I would have had are here as well. However, I personally feel more comfortable playing a gay character, and wasn't sure how you'd want people to handle it in the setting - I would be okay if you all wanted to have it be frowned upon in the setting, but I'd prefer it not be (had to deal with that from extended family, which sucks, but oh well).

Hey there Player 3.

Sexuality is a tricky subject in a period piece, but I think it is also fertile story writing material.

In my humble opinion, most of the material I have come across would prohibit open homosexuality in this part of the world at this time. That is just the way it was unfortunately.

However I think it could be easily argued that homosexual inclinations were as prevalent then as they are now, and that many people found ways to "get around" persecution in the public eye.

So long as the character is well played and interesting, having his sexuality as a story element only adds to the richness of the game in my mind.

Is he the sort to maintain a family for the sake of legitimacy? Is he attracted to the notion of religious orders to justify a "single" lifestyle?

Has he been intrigued by the rumors of tolerance among the populations along the Mediterranean? Or in the "East" spread by traveller's to those parts?

Etc.

And of course, at the end of the day, I am but another player. This is all up to our generous GM for taking the time to run this for us.

In reply to Player 2 (msg # 8):

I understand that, just wasn't sure what the rest of the group would want. As far as my guy goes, I feel like he might actually harbor feelings for his liege lord (since i pictured the two as being close since they were boys) which obviously adds another layer to the whole thing.

These belong here:

Okay, my take on same-sex relations is that they have always existed, but that because of the Catholic Church in this part of the world it was kept secret. This in itself is a story seed that helps create story, but that is only valuable to us if that's a story we want to tell. If it's too traumatic or brings up bad memories than we can 'put a veil on it' so to speak. We just have to have the condemnation be off-screen.

I am also not sure how much people in the middle-ages really cared. Lords kind of were mostly concerned about receiving their taxes from their serfs, whatever they did in their free time was not really of any concern (unless it means a sudden drop in kids being born, thinning the workforce, I guess.) It's basically the same with witchcraft/pagan practices. They are mainly only a problem when other things become a problem because of it. Serfs and peasants generally could get away with it. There would be talk of course, but there would also be talk about other things. People like to gossip.

On the other hand, as a noble it could cause problems, because the Church is watching you more. But bribes were a form of absolution (I mean, I know I'm a protestant, but that's basically how indulgences work, right? You sin, and then you buy an indulgence. The Pope is happy he can build his cathedrals, etc. There were kings who built monasteries so that monks could pray on their behalf just so that the King could shed blood in the wars they liked so much. There are ways around, and in the Middle Ages, money and power were often more a god than YHWH was.) The more powerful you are as a noble, the more you can get away with.

Knightly Knights and their comradely would also have the potential for exploring same-sex attraction in a way that was allowed to them at that point. So I could see that as a possible avenue. Often brothers at arms loved each other more deeply than they loved any woman. It is said that it's not in a romantic or erotic way, but some people claim otherwise as well. You never know what happens behind the doors of the knightly orders. The Knights Templar have strange stories told about them.

Also, the knights were quickly becoming obsolete due to the crossbows, the English longbows and gunpowder weaponry (like canons). Knighthood was a nostalgic thing of men trying to feel extra manly. So there's that. A social club with extra testosterone. I feel like checking out each other's muscles and scars might be an activity they did in these orders. I feel like there were emotions involved in this.

And then there's the clergy, where some would go to try and escape their taboo feelings and choose abstinence over sin, only to be confronted with others who made the same choice. And Catholicism's way of doing penance and buying indulgences makes sure that you can sin a little, as long as you do penence for it later.

I've been using the word sin a lot as that's how the church viewed it back then (and at some places still today) but we could play it more as a commentary on the church. Rather than emphasizing the 'sin' of same-sex attraction, we could emphasize the sin of the church taking bribes or not showing enough love/grace to its members. This is a time that the church was loosing its position of power slightly. There was a lot of criticism of the church rising up in this time. The nepotism, the bribes, the open sin of the clergy at times. Popes with secret wives, etc.

We can take the route of the out of the way province (which is why I chose Rethel), where the ruler disappeared and a Castellan (a minor noble) has to move in with his staff to manage the estate. There are precedents of Castellan's being Lady's as well. I'd have to look up who in the Burgundian family line it was, but there was a lady that knew how to fight and ride horses etc, and she would defend her keep and manage the estate.

Anyway, I've been writing a lot. I'll stop at this and pick things up as we talk about it.

Historically, there's less consistency about how much the Church prioritised their homophobia (or at least had the power to affect it) than one might think. It was always company policy, so to speak, and tended to give good copy to those ranting about sin, but outside of times of Inquistion, it's not massively clear how much it was nodded at rather than actually pursued,

There were several gay kings of England who the Church had absolutely no problem working with, and as long as you were a good Catholic who didn't murder the Pope, steal Church lands and generally agreed to dislike non Christians, you were probably just ignored or told to do penance. I suspect part of the concern was more that, at least in noble terms, you were less likely to produce heirs, which tended to muck up family alliances.

Also, it's problematic to view the Church in the period as either monolithic or indeed all powerful - while individual bishops may have been hugely influential, the extent of Church influence in any given region varied dramatically, as indeed their willingness or interest in prosecuting certain aspects of Church and canon law.  Most were more interested in getting rich.

Short answer to more closely address P3's point, I've certainly got no problem in you playing an LGBT+ character if you want, and I think there's no issue with all of the party being absolutely fine with it. I think we can equally well portray a relatively tolerant Burgundy or a more intolerant one depending on what P3 wants for the game. It's not a completely accurate game (given magic) so we can play around with levers a bit.

Agreed.

Just to get everyone on the same page, we've discussed three main areas so far:

A) Portrayal of magic
B) General structure of the game
C) Portrayal of LGBTQ+ characters in game

Might it be possible for our GM to give some pointers as to what we've decided and what we need to discuss further on the above?

As a sub point (and slightly linked to the above), are we portraying faith as having any supernatural properties in the game? I'm not massively keen per se, but I defer to other players for it.

In reply to Player 1 (msg # 14):

I would think the supernatural of the divine would be treated the same way magic would. This is a good time for it. Joan of Arc (recently captured) claimed she could speak with angels for example. I would treat it as mainly prophecy and generally out of players' direct control. As in, you don't have any 'powers' of prophecy or whatever, but you could position yourself fictionally (fasting and praying, etc.) for a chance of something happening. It is also, very rare. People who can do miracles generally become saints afterwards.

As to what type of story or game. I think from what we've discussed, I think a good suggestion would be:

You are the retinue of the Castellan taking over for the fleeing count. You can be servants, knights, courtiers, advisers, in-house priests or even the Castellan him- or herself. The main function of the castellan is to keep things going. To hear the people, collect taxes, upkeep the manor/castle/... of the County of Rethel. Things might pop up that need doing, but I'm mainly giving you a backdrop/sandbox to play in.

It would be good if you're a group that could work together, like a company of knights, a group of servants (like in upstairs, downstairs) or a group of courtiers (if you want to play the intrigue game). Another option is that you are all villagers in a village that has to adapt to the new castellan. Do they want to pay their taxes if they don't know he/she will care for them? Can they give taxes when all the milk mysteriously soured? Things like that.

We could also just have everyone run around separately and occasionally encounter each other. Forum play lends itself to that more easily than live play does. If that is an option we'd have to see how we handle timing and the sort, perhaps giving players who are 'ahead' in the story the option of running an NPC in another's story.

In these constraints, what kind of story are you interested in playing? An action oriented game about knights, a mystery game about strange occurrences, a backstabbing game of courtly intrigue? Maybe something else? Let's brainstorm!

I'm certainly happy with the idea of playing the Castellan's retinue/instruments of their will - I think it gives us enough leeway to both set some policy and be affected by it, and we're largely in a situation where we've got the scope to explore and find plot threads and hooks where they exist.

There's also a lot of scope to fill in different roles and specialities within the retinue and have some minor dramatic conflict within the group but still have everyone willing to pull together when it matters.

Of the three types of game suggested, I'd probably opt for more of a mystery one and really dig into the slightly dark, atmospheric and febrile environment of late medieval Europe at the time, in an ever so slightly Solomon Kane/Witcher/witch hunter vibe (without going too far into steampunk etc).

If we're going combat heavy, then I think you'd want more of an ordered system like DnD rather than the more collaborative play of the Pool, and intrigue potentially risks metagaming and a lot of potential PvP.

That being said, I'd probably also want to invoke a bit of a Buffy style approach of having an existing, more normal human plot which runs at the same time and behind the mystery things, to provide a bit of normality and human drama, as well as providing us something which emotionally anchors us and means we actually want to risk life and limb to defend those within the County.

As always, happy to comprimise dependning on other player wants :)

Again, I agree with the majority of what player 1 is saying.

I would prefer to see combat as being more rare, and very serious when it does happen. This is despite likely wanting to play a character along the lines of a younger knight.

Without the "healing potion" phenomenon, and with the kind of medical technology, arms and armor we see in that period. I would like armed struggle to retain some real danger and a strong narrative impact.

Mystery is good for all the reasons mentioned, and yes, some "slice of life" play apart from the work the characters do for the Castellan. A glimpse into their lives, would be a welcome addition.

In reply to Player 2 (msg # 17):

I would be okay with that as well.

Alright! Character creation time. The link to the rules is posted in the Rules and regulations topic. Whatever you come up with, in the end should work with that. I think it was a description of 50 words. Feel free to brainstorm and research first and then narrow, summarize and refine. I’ll help where I can, but now it’s bedtime for me.

So I've got a couple of concepts in mind, but I'd like to get a pointer from the other players to see what they're going for so I'm not treading on anyone's toes.

If memory serves, P2 was considering something down the young knight line, and P3 was thinking someone with a link to the liege lord, if I'm not mistaken?

In reply to Player 1 (msg # 20):

I was thinking a young knight as well

That's very good of you, and yes, I have been brainstorming a concept in that direction.

While I am still working on my 50 word breakdown, the character I have in mind is a young, somewhat disillusioned Knight who is still struggling with his experiences as a Squire during the brutal suppression of the Revolt of Ghent.

His story will likely include themes like the decline of the Chivalric values, the advance of technology and the growing obsolescence of the professional Knight.

The role of the armed enforcers in the 15th century European system and hereditary expectations...

What we would know as PTSD will likely play some part as well.

I'm going to try to leave a fair amount of the unknown that will hopefully come up organically during play, but that's where I am at so far.

Sounds like a plan - any thoughts on some more specific angles you might want to take them?

In reply to Player 1 (msg # 23):

not totally sure yet, would need to think on it

No worries.

For the sake of balance and indeed to pursue a slightly different angle, I'm tempted to play a female character, although I'm not sure whether to go down the route of a religious angle (because who doesn't want to go down the nun route once in their life), a merchant angle or something a little more controversial in terms of the more druidy-herbalist route (which I will admit has been done to death, but could be interesting).

I will also give it a thought.

Good ideas! And there are no bad ideas in brainstorming. It’s just throwing them at the wall and seeing what sticks, like the pasta none of these knights would know. Unless thise with links to Italy, and even then, I don’t know the history of pasta. Was it even around? (anyway, rabbit trail)

• Merchants are fun, because they have a lot of contacts I can play with. Depending on what kind of merchant you are you might also need to travel. Traveling is an issue if the other characters have a more sedentary function or do not have a reason to travel with you. We could also aways play an episodic way where after each episode you could decide wether to play a new character that fits the story or keepplaying the one you made. So if the first arc is two knights tasked with escorting a merchant, that is fine with me. After everything is resolved there, we could see what we do next. And that, in forum play, is a lot of if’s and when’s. In September school will start again for me and I’ll need to teach again, so things might get slowed down or come to a pause, but I’ll at least try to resolve the story.

• The nun angle could be fun because not all nuns have become nuns for religious reasons. Some have been put there for other reasons, either they saw something they shouldn’t have or they are being too involved with the machinations of their family. Some try to remain pure because of before mentioned gender issues and some might just be afraid of never landing a husband that would be able to provide for them and thus go to a convent where at least they have a place to sleep and meals to eat. Some might have actually had visions or dreams that they cannot explain other than divine involvement, so the religious options is certainly on the table still. The more difficult part is the reason why nuns would be traveling. They usually stayed in their convent, removed from the world. If we stay around the manor she might be a teacher for the Castelan’s children perhaps. Not sure if nuns actually thaught already back then though. That might have been a later development. They were often employed as nurses though, I think. So that’s an angle perhaps.

• The druidic/pagan/herbalist option is certainly there. We’d have to think about how she’s involved in the court. She might have some protection from the Castelan and be employed as a healer for the manor and those employed there. Alchemy was also a big thing at that time but probably more of a male thing I think. She could provide story in the sense that she might have to hide her beliefs, has to look for special ingredients and is an inroad to more supernatural stuff, or controversially more down to earth, debunking the evil demon hammering on the tooth as just a result of tooth decay. I think it would work best if she somehow has a connection to the manor or castellan.

This is just my brainstorm on those ideas.

This could work in different ways. Having two knights could mean they might have had the same master, but different characters or experiences, showing how they are different. Or they might come from different houses, showing a different interpretation of chivalry. Maybe the one still believes in it, while the other does it out of familial obligation.

You may be a hedgeknight or a travelling knight, roaming the land looking for good and righteous things to do, though that one is unlikely, since knights are often needed in battle. France and England are not on the best terms. I think there might be a sort of peace treaty around this time, but I’d have to look that up, and I probably don’t have the time for that today.

I think I'm probably leaning towards the merchant line - I think my concept would probably be that she's the only child of a relatively prosperous merchant who fell ill a few years ago and has been convalescing at home for the intervening period, to the point where no-one outside the family has actually seen him since.

As such, his daughter has dutifully been acting as his go-between to continue to allow the wheels of trade to function, and this would be the only reason she's been accepted in a male dominated society (she's basically considered to be an honorary man for the purposes of trade)

---

Spoiler text: (Highlight or hover over the text to view)
I'm playing around with the possibility that he's been dead for a while, and that my character has been continuing with the pretence because she doesn't want to get married and lose her independence, but I'm not sure whether to start with that as a definite or keep that as a potential surprise/mystery

---

Given her abilities and the small but prosperous trade family she represents (and effectively runs), the castellan has been very interested in keeping her around in his court, and she acts as a co-ordinator for other agents of her father who do more of the busy work (like hauling and supplying places). For the Castellan, she's probably some combination of financier and diplomat, with the potential to also be a fence or a smuggler if the situation requires.

At the same time, she's got enough independence to be able to do her own thing, and enough status (presumably encouraged by the castellan, who needs her money) to get people to do what she wants without too much work, but has a link to a court so I don't need to continually up sticks when required.

Thoughts?

I suppose the other thing to remember is that knights are as much a status thing as anything else, and plenty of nobles got their sons knighted for political reasons rather than purely for their skill and service on the battlefield.

Given we're 7 years after the hundred years war, there could be a good chance that your character might never have seen battle (or very limited battle) and owed their knighthood to family reasons, and thus has a more open character if you wanted to go down more of a bookish/courtier route. But it's obviously your choice :)

That sounds really interesting! Great job! I’m wondering what she might be dealing in. Lace was a big luxury item at that time I think, (or that might be a bit later) if you want to go that route. I think the people who made lace were traditionally women as well, so there’s even more of the women’s rights angle if needed, but the area is really forested, so it might be lumber, or woodcrafted goods. There might be mines, I’d need to look for that, or you could be a big cattle-holder.

Once you’ve got what you want you should try to summarize it to 50 words, as per the rules. Once that is done, then comes the time for highlighting parts of that summary and assigning values/dice to them.

That does sound like an interesting concept.

We get some feminine influence, some commercial interest and a perspective from outside the landed powers.

How are things looking for you Player 3?

And what step should I be working on now GM?

Once you’ve made your description of 50 words (character’s name doesn’t count), you go to step two of the rules. Traits and bonusses. You start with a pool of 15 dice.

So something like this?

Gerhard de Colmar is a young knight in the service of Charles the First. Heir to a small Imperial Free City in the Alsace, he squired under the chivalrous Knight Gaspar de Durtain prior to his accolade. A veteran of the Revolt of Ghent, he still struggles with his experiences from that campaign.

Traits could be

Heir to a small Imperial Free City +2

( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_imperial_city )

and

Veteran of the Revolt of Ghent +2

( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...t_(1449%E2%80%931453) )

Leaving him with 7 dice in his Pool?

In reply to Player 2 (msg # 31):

I'm still very much thinking on my guy and learning the rules, since i'm brand new to the system.

In reply to Player 2 (msg # 33):

I think this is okay, but could be better (sorry, I'm a teacher). These traits will tell me as the GM what parts of your character you're interested in exploring. It could even be people, right? From the example we can also see that you can have a trait which you don't put bonuses/dice in. Since you chose to mention the knight you squired under, that could also be a part. If you don't think you want to explore it much, you put no bonuses on it, if you think it is you can give it a bonus.

"Squired under the chivalrous Knight Gaspar de Durtain" would give you a contact to call upon, a step up in networking in the courts (depending on his reputation) and something that could be rolled to reflect on the chivalric lessons or morality you learned there.

"Heir to a small Imperial Free City +2" implies you have duties outside of Rethel and might be called upon. It would make it questionable as to why you are here, except perhaps to try and make a name of yourself or to try and learn how to govern a city. On the other hand, some went adventuring out of chivalric nostalgia or to make a name for themselves. The +2 means you intend to use it regularly. Uses could be in political/governmental challenges (you learned how to govern and move among the court), cultural challenges (you probably speak whatever kind of German they spoke in the HRE back then and might spot blind spots that local people won't see) and others (I had something in mind and I lost my train of thought while typing). This is decent. I can work with it.

"Veteran of the Revolt of Ghent +2" is good, but from your description that is not exactly what he is. Or that's not all that it is to him. He has those doubts/struggles, right? So we might make it something like "Struggling Veteran of the Revolt of Ghent." It will mean that he can relate to brothers in arms, has a lot of contacts from that period of life and knows how to fight. It also means he can relate to the struggles people are going through and can probably give comfort in that way or help inspire or even discourage soldiers in certain actions. I know the struggling part is implied in veteran, but it's best to be clear. Being an Heir to an Imperial Free City as well might raise questions of loyalty indeed after seeing the attitude of the Duke of Burgundy towards a city with some autonomy. Or he might want to learn from it, depending on how his character develops. Does he rule with an iron fist or with a velvet glove?

Great job all around! I like the character! I like the synergy between the traits. There's a lot of things for me to challenge this character with.

About the bonuses. You can leave a lot of dice in your pool, which might seem like a good idea, but pool dice get lost. Bonuses stay, even when you fail. So a trait with more bonuses on it has a higher and more reliable chance of succeeding even when your pool is low.

I haven't actually run the system, but I think that's the trade-off. You want some pool dice to bump your chances, but you also want to be reliably good at things.

Don't worry. Don't start thinking about the system. First start thinking about the character. Then we can adjust and summarize.

You want to be a young knight. What about that idea appeals to you?

As a former teacher myself, this reads like far too many of the feedback slips I used to give out to my sixth formers. Usually followed by several litres of red ink and sarcastic comments about the positioning of apostrophes.

I am aiming to get my character description out this evening!

In reply to The Powers That Be (msg # 37):

I was thinking my guy would kind of be a mix of the sort of stereotypical chivalrous knight, as well as a knight who might be in a military order if possible

So I've got my proposed character description and sheet below:

X is the sole daughter and representative of a long convalescent Flemish wool merchant. Acting as his deputy, she advises and finances the Castellan. A minor patron of the arts, her reputation is nonetheless tainted by rumours of links to owlers and smugglers, and her seeming disinterest in finding a husband.

And my trait and bonuses follow:

Representative of a long convalescent Flemish wool merchant +2

This one is pretty straight-forward - I would consider it would manifest itself partly in terms of reputation and social acceptance, as well as access to a certain amount of discretionary funds and cash on hand which would make her life easier.

Advises and finances the Castellan. +1

Again, this one would be somewhat straight forward - partially, it's reputational and gives a certain degree of influence, but she's also not so prominent in court that she's untoucheable, so she needs to be careful.

Minor patron of the arts +1

This one just adds a small bit of background, but it would probably translate to some in-game knowledge, as well as potentially easier reception from artists or those with particular interests.

Rumours of links to owlers and smugglers +2

So, this one was really fun, because I learned something fun about the Wool Trade. So, in the 1100-1300s, Flanders became rich by buying raw English wool, spinning it and selling it at a profit for textiles. England didn't like this and tried to set up their own textile industry, and basically banned export of raw wool from 1367. If you smuggled wool out of the county, you tended to have to do it under dark and were hence known as an owler (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owling), and if you got caught, punishment was potentially quite painful.

So, my thought was that my thus far nameless character is well aware this is going on and has some contacts among the owling community, who she can use to help keep her business having a competitive edge, and also to potentially provide other services on the Burgundian coast and rivers, including smuggling and other stuff. They don't work for her per se, but she knows who to talk to if she needs to call in a favour.


Thoughts?

In reply to The Powers That Be (msg # 35):

Thanks for all the great feedback!

I can add +2 to the suggested Squired under the chivalrous Knight Gaspar de Durtain. It's a good idea and I had debated using it early. It does provide that additional contact and allows for some sage wisdom to filter down in play.

I can drop Heir to a small Imperial Free City to +1. I did briefly consider why Gerhard would be in Rethel as opposed to his Father's land, but I honestly sort of chalked it up to. "Because the Count of Nevers was the first one that offered" or "That's where his mentors contacts were."

But I think after a little consideration, he is in Rethel because it's exciting and good for his career. It's bound to be far more active and cosmopolitan than the little mountain city where he was raised, where he could easily ride across his families entire holding in a single day.

Yes, he could go back to Colmar, and while he misses his family and would enjoy the familiar comforts in a way, he feels he would be giving up on his future prospects. Admitting to himself that being Squired under Durtain will likely remain the highlight of his career, and that he should settle into a relatively quiet life of tax collection and local law enforcement.

How does Haunted Veteran of the Revolt of Ghent sound?

I went with this one over the more simple "trained Knight" example in the book because I feel it clarifies his position as a fighting sort among the other potential meanings.

I also wanted to mention the specific campaign because I had hoped it would be more evocative. It might be the difference between saying that one had a relative that served as a soldier in the Second World War, and saying that you had a relative that fought at the Siege of Stalingrad.

Both true, but because of the nature of that particular battle the second phrase sets a different tone.

In reply to Player 3 (msg # 39):

At this point in history most chivalric orders are still military. There are plenty of them. In Burgundy the main ones were the Order of the Golden Fleece and The Noble Order of Saint George of Rougemont. The French had a Rival Faction to the Order of the Golden Fleece, which was the Order of Saint Micheal. The English had the Order of the Garter. (But why they would be in our place is a bit weird. The war with France is over and they are needed as the War of the Roses is momentarily raging in England.) Wikipedia has some well linked examples, and those without pages can be google searched to find the one you like.

In reply to The Powers That Be (msg # 42):

Alright! I was thinking maybe my guy was in the Order of the Golden Fleece

In reply to Player 3 (msg # 43):

Alright. He's in the order of the Golden Fleece. That means he is nobility of some sort. It's a very exclusive order with only a set amount of members. What did he do to get admitted to it? Did he inherit the position from a father who died, did get awarded a position through a chivalric deed or did he sign up himself out of a desire to be in there?

To read up on the Order of the Golden Fleece read only the part under "Origins" in this wiki page.

In reply to The Powers That Be (msg # 44):

He was awarded a position in the Order for saving the life of a knight in the order during a battle.

The most recent conflict that you could have been involved in if you want to be a young knight is probably the Revolt of Ghent, but you could also have participated in the Hundred Years War, which ended in the same year.

The most glory would have been had in the Hundred Year War probably, since it was the most important and biggest conflict of the times between the two biggest powers. You'd have more chance of having foreign contacts and battle glory. But you'd also notice the effect of the longbows and the cannons and what that meant for the decline of the usability of knights in combat.

In reply to The Powers That Be (msg # 46):

Alright! I'm not sure how realistic it would be for my guy to have been involved in both since he's in his early 20s, but I could see either option working.

If it would help Player 3, Gerhard is currently 25 and was only a Squire of 17 when the Revolt started.

While he did participate in some of the fighting, for him it was really more about what he saw there. Mass executions, ugly siege warfare, the aftermath of artillery salvos.

If you were so inclined, we could sort of play off between the dichotomy. Your character could have been involved in a fortunate and heroic deed in a more renowned action during the Hundred Years War, earning him a place in the Order despite his young age.

For him, that war could have been a huge step up for himself and his family.

For Gerhard, the Revolt was a horrific experience that cost the lives of some of his friends, including a man he really admired.

Having the two disparate outlooks could lead to some interesting interaction despite both of them having gone to war.
This message was last edited by the player at 20:51, Thu 15 July 2021.

In reply to Player 1 (msg # 40):

This is great and full of potential.I’m not immediately seeing how I’m going to tie you in with the knights, but it should be possible.

In reply to Player 2 (msg # 41):

I approve greatly! Well done! I think I still need to unlock character sheets and will get on that!

Well, it's a bit up to you, but you can either slice of life it (say a chance meeting on the road as she travels through the domain), or have them put on a mission together where they're lending a degree of legitimacy and protection while she's possibly doing some more delicate work.

In reply to Player 1 (msg # 51):

Exactly. I’ll figure something out.

Beyond chosing a name and some pictures, is there anything else you want us to do in the meantime?

In reply to Player 1 (msg # 53):

I don't need anything purse, but you could give me some hints about what kind of things you'd like to see happening in the story in general and for your character personally. This is not something you'd have to do, but it helps me choose paths to take the story into.

You could also talk amongst each other on wether your characters already know each other (and how) or not.

What I'm thinking at the moment is that you have come with the Castellan. Our trader wants to prospect the county to see what is available everywhere and the Castellan sends the two knights with her as protection. He has also asked you to kind of take stock of what's going on in the County.

Another thing I was thinking is that the Castellan holds a sort of feast/holiday for the people of the County to celebrate his taking over the Manor for now. He wants to gain favor with the people. Food is sent to every village in the county and you three are one of the groups of messengers bearing food-gifts that are sent to the people.

In terms of the story, I largely leave that up to you as a GM. The main thing I'm looking for is enough investment in the setting and the characters of the manor/villages to feel that my actions have consequences and to invest in them, and that we're encouraged to make choices based on what our characters might do, rather than just on what is expendient.

As a player, I'm a lot more likely to risk my character's skin for an NPC I know and like, rather than for Generic Villager #3.

Aside from that, I'd always be interested in some character specific plot arcs, but I'd prefer them to be in the form of bonus objectives rather than 'this is a P1/P2/P3 centric mission'. That, a bit of horror/supernatural to keep on one's toes, some fun antagonists, and I should be happy :)

Suggestion for player 3:

(name) is a promising young knight that has shown valour and bravery during the hundred years war. Saving a fellow knight (name) was awarded entry in the Order of the Golden Fleece. Now that this war is over he is looking for other opportunities to fulfill his chivalric oath and seek glory.

This is exactly fifty words (the name does not count for words) and has enough in it to put bonusses on.
What do you think? You could give the saved knight a name and make it a bit more personal, but this is a first draft.

There is a list of the knights of the golden fleece on wikipedia. Going through you could try and see which one would fit. In reading some of them there seems to have been another conflict that wasn’t apparrent in my previous browsing, and it seemed to have to do with a conflict against the archbishop of Köln.
This message had punctuation tweaked by the GM at 11:00, Sat 17 July 2021.

Some good candidates are:

1. The Heir, Charles, Count of Charolais.
2. Hendrik II van Borselen, who as a knight had charge over the state approved piracy in the English Channel and the North Sea. There is no English language page for him. Only Dutch, German, French and Russian.
3. John II, Duke of Alençon. Most famous for capturing Joan of Arc. (You were probably too young to have participated in that, but it made him quite legendary amongst troops I'd presume. At the start of our game he would be in prison for defaming the king.
4. John I, Duke of Cleves, on which the Dutch Wiki has a bunch more to say iirc.

There are more, but look these over quick to see who you'd be interested in.

5. Jaques de Lalaing, one of the most knightly knights that ever knighted … and got killed by cannon fire at the revolt in Ghent. A symbol of the beginning of the end for knighthood.
6. Anthony, Bastard of Burgundy, a knight of many titles and probably about the same age as our two young knighhts.
7. Adolph of Cleves, Lord of Ravenstein, a good kniht who fought in all the Burgundian wars.

In reply to The Powers That Be (msg # 56):

I love that! I'll think some on a name this weekend.

Hi!

I'm thinking of a scheming noblelady, of high enough birth that she can actually get something done. From a first reading of your historical setting, here are a few ideas that come to mind:

1) The wife (Marie d'Albret) or one of the daughters of the Count, left behind as he fled to France. Either as a diplomatic agent to make sure no other dynasty tries to usurp Rethel, or for apparently unrelated reasons (e.g. say she's one of the daughters, and she was married to someone local, so she stayed with her husband while her father fled; recently the husband died and she's suddenly free to politick around).

2) One of the (many) illegitimate daughters of Philip the Good. Being the recognised bastard of a Duke is not the worst that can happen to a girl, but she still has to hustle to find herself a suitable husband and carve some power for herself. Perhaps she thinks that the current situation in Rethel is an opportunity: a power vaccum in which she can step in, marry some strongman and help him take the county, place herself as Countess.

3) Same-ish but a more minor noblelady: the lady-in-waiting and confidante of one of the previous characters, running secret errands for her mistress. Loyal and ready to do whatever it takes for said lady, or happy to betray her too and replace her as soon as she sees the opportunity. Or perhaps the wife of the castellan, who thinks her husband has too little ambition and should try to make himself Count, à la Lady Macbeth.

Any of those sound any good?

I like the third one best, but I think each of these can work.

OK, I think I might try to combine 2 and 3. I like 2 because it gives her some status (and she's going to need it, being a woman in the 15th century), and I guess the good part about 3 is it gives her some sort of official role, am I correct? She probably needs a purpose/excuse to be in Rethel (being the new lady's right hand), because unmarried women are not supposed to just travel and hang around with their buddies, right?

So with this in mind, what about this:

---

Anne d’Arras is an illegitimate daughter of Philip the Good. She followed the ducal court until her courtly intrigues and liaisons landed her in a nunnery. There she befriended Marie d’Hainaut and became her confidante. Secretly she is driven to become the Countess of Rethel.

Let me know if this makes any sense, it's the first time I play The Pool. I'm trying to make a Medici-like intriguer, so I'd break it down like this:

---

Bastard daughter of the Duke +1

This should provide some status and contacts, which I'm guessing she is going to need. Although she has no titles or lands, well, she's still of the Duke's blood. That should carry some weight.


Raised in the Burgundian court +1

By all accounts the most sophisticated place in Europe at the time, so I'd expect her to know a lot of cool people, have a fine fashion sense and know etiquette, dances, and the works.


Adept at courtly intrigue +2

Main skill, I suppose? How to start rumours, how to flirt without being jailed...


Spent time in a nunnery +1

Some theology, some Latin, an excuse to be literate.


Lady-in-waiting and confidante of Marie d’Hainaut

This gives her an excuse to be in Rethel, and access to the Castellan's inner family circle. I'm thinking this was how she got out of the nunnery, as Marie's +1 when she married. So at the time it was just a way to regain her freedom...


Driven to become Countess of Rethel +2

...but now that she's in Rethel, she smells opportunity. The Count and his family are away, the Castellan is some Flemish outsider, Anne has the ear of his wife... Perhaps this is the perfect time to make her move, marry, acquire a more stable position in life.

---

Pool: 4

---

Feedback on this, please?
This message was last edited by the player at 12:34, Sun 18 July 2021.

This looks great. I don’t immediately see a way to improve on it. You probably went to the feast “out of solidarity” with the castellan. But really, lot’s of nobility around. Time to show how good of a catch you are. There’s these two young promising knights. Maybe you could get them to dance and see what they’re made of. Also, there’s this intruiging saleswoman that everyone’s talking about. Handeling the buisness of a sick father with great skill! How unusual!

The only remark I think I have is that the Flemish weren’t outsiders, but part of Burgundy. Not everything of what we now call Flanders, but still. Leuven (in Brabant) was an important city for Burgundy, as was Mechelen (where I currently live, not sure what Dutchy it was in, gotta remedy that) and Ghent (Flanders) has been mentioned before.

Yay! Thanks, that's great to hear.

My only doubt is whether I should add something mentioning lands or a sizeable dowry, because as Anne stands now, she sounds pretty broke to me. A few dresses, some jewlry and essentials, and little more, probably. I don't know if this might be  a problem.



Oh yes, absolutely, Flanders is part of the Burgundian state, which is a bit of a collage of very different lands. What I meant is (and maybe I'm wrong, let me know), the locals of Rethel are probably, ethnically speaking, French? Whereas someone called "le Flamand" is probably ethnically Flemish, meaning, he speaks a different language and all that, even being part of the same political entity. So I assumed the locals might regard them as foreigners and carpetbaggers. Let me know if this is not the case, because Anne might want to capitalise on that idea at some point in her intrigues...
This message was last edited by the player at 14:29, Sun 18 July 2021.

That sounds very reasonable to me.

Alright! I think my guy will be called Roland de Sergius. He saved Jaques de Lalaing before he was killed by canon fire. GM, would you need any information on Roland's liege lord/lover? Completely fine if not

In reply to Player 3 (msg # 67):

Sure, I’d like that. The more string you give me to pull on you the better! *evil laugh*

I was looking for a suitable nunnery for Anne, and I found this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tart_Abbey

Amusing name aside, Le Tart is near Dijon, so in the Burgundian heartlands, and it seems it was pretty prestigious, and eventually became the place of choice for noble families to dump their unwanted daughters. "By the 16th century the abbey was in a state of advanced decadence and moral collapse, which neither bishops nor popes were able to remedy, and was notorious for its worldly life and sexual impropriety." This all suits the character very well.

If the Powers that Be approve it, I'll add the name to my trait.
This message was last edited by the player at 08:39, Mon 19 July 2021.

Stamp of approval granted.

Good find Anne.

I am now imagining something akin to the infamous Castle Anthrax.

Wouldn't you like that :P

"See, your Holiness, it's all her fault! She started the advanced decadence and moral collapse! Her with her visible ankles, use of contrations when doing bible readings, and seasoning her meals! She's to blame!"

What! Vile slander, hold thy poisonous tongue! I have never seasoned my ankles!

Great writing everyone! I've moved the story forward, and Roland can fall in when he's ready. English isn't my primary language, so I'm going to try my best, but I'm afraid I won't be as eloquent as you all are.

Challenge accepted.

In reply to The Powers That Be (msg # 75):

Is there any particular way you'd like me to introduce him?

You've got free reign, as long as it makes sense in the fiction.

I think I might have to do some research on dances and fashion. I'm pretty sure Anne should be wearing that conical hat with a veil on top, the stereotypical Medieval Princess Hat.

Yeah, I had to do a bit of research for Helena, mainly to work out the basics of what she'd be wearing. Credit where it's due, because wikipedia's section on the subject is pretty extensive and accessible.

In reply to Helena of Ghent (msg # 80):
I'm Wikipedia'ing most of it too, yes.

So if I'm reading it right, this is a few decades before things go really complicated. But Anne's outfit still consists of a lot of layers:

* a chemise, which counts as underwear, and one wears it to bed probably; linen and undyed.
* a kirtle, which could have been the dress, which includes a fitted bodice, square-necked and laced tight,
* the dress proper, v-necked so as to show an inverted triangle of kirtle and maybe a bit of chemise poking under that. I suppose this must have been somewhat suggestive?

To combine with a chenin (called a turret, a chimney, or a mitre, depending on the source), which is the Stereotypical Princess Conical Hat With a Veil At The Tip. Some dude complains in 1464 that "the more beautiful and young they are, the taller their chimneys", which probably means it had been around for a few years. With exaggeratedly pointy shoes (also for men).

This is the Duchess of Anjoy and Lorraine, circa 1460. Apparently a fashion icon of the time. Taken from https://fashionhistory.fitnyc.edu/1460-1469/

Everyting looks awfully heavy and warm, I imagine Anne sweating under all that stuff, in the July heat, and in a room filled with people.
This message was last edited by the player at 14:39, Tue 20 July 2021.

Yeah, that's how I've read it. I think it's one of the reasons I've set Helena to be a bit less interested in fashion for the period, because it gets stupid complicated and it's not my particular area of interest. I think we're a few decades prior to slashing being a thing, which I at least know something about.

That being said, I suspect one would wear less if one wasn't on official duty, so to speak.

If the July of 1460 was anything like the July of 2021, Anne is dying to retreat to her chamber and take everything off.

I will admit I'm in a cooler part of the UK, and even I've resorted to wrapping freezer blocks in tea towels to keep me cool at work.

Random question to our GMness, do I know Durant, or at least of him?

Yes. You knwo bim through your smuggling contacts. If you want to randomly decide wether or not things are well between Dour Durant and yourself you can make a roll with one die. If not everything’s fine. You’ve worked with him before. He’s, well, dour, but other than that reliable and discreet.

Let the dice Rethel the story.

But the dice scare me, and I don't wish to risk my important business relationships to the luck of the draw!