Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Saracen Religious Bonus

  1. #1

    Saracen Religious Bonus

    I have noticed that K&L on p.113 lists the Saracen religious bonus as +3 HP and +1 damage The GPC in Appendix Four gives this as +3 HP and +2 damage. Which value is correct?
    Last edited by Rhebeqah; 08-30-2016 at 11:05 PM.

  2. #2
    The later version supersedes the former unless the Gamemaster says otherwise

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    2,870
    Quote Originally Posted by Rhebeqah View Post
    I have noticed that K&L on p.113 lists the Saracen religious bonus as +3 HP and +1 damage The GPC in Appendix Four gives this as +3 HP and +2 damage. Which value is correct?
    Like jmberry said.

    Although, comparing the different bonuses...

    If +1d6 damage (Wotanic) is comparable to +6 HP (Christians), it follows that +1d6/2 (3.5/2 =1.75 rounds to 2) is equivalent to +3 HP, and so the Saracen bonus should be +3 HP, +2 damage to be equivalent to the Wotanic and Christians. Personally, though, I think +2 damage is way better than +3 HP, so I am quite happy with BoK&L +3 HP, +1 damage. +1 damage just feels more equivalent to +3 HP. Which means that the Wotanic bonus might be a bit overpowered, but on the other hand, gaining it pretty much means kissing Chivalric good bye, and +3 Armor makes up for the +1d6 damage.

  4. #4
    I don't thin the Wotanic bonus is over powered at all. British Christians get +3 damage and +2 hit points. The +3 is almost as good a +1d6 (3.5) , plus the Brit gets +2 hit points, and not only gets to keep the Chivalric bonus, but practically has it handed to him.

    So the Brits get almost as good a damage bonus, extra armor that almost negates the Wotantic bonus, plus a couple of hit points. So much for Wotanic.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    2,870
    Greg stated in BoK&L quite unequivocally that British Christian Cymric Knight is already 'minmaxed'. So no, I am not surprised that option comes head and shoulders before everyone else.

    However, I was comparing Wotanic +1d6 Damage to Roman Christian +6HP, and in that comparison, RC loses out to Wotanic, IMHO.

    +1d6 Damage is a huge advantage in a fight. Just look at the difference between 4d6 knight and 5d6 knight: The former often doesn't even trigger a Knockdown and the hits bounce off armor+shield, while 5d6 is chipping away at the enemy and most of the time, triggers a knockdown roll. 6d6 knight roughly triples the average damage past armor and shield compared to 5d6, and might even cause a Major Wound on a normal hit, if the opposing knight doesn't get a shield. A Wotanic Saxon Knight could even get 8d6 Damage in KAP 5.2, making automatic knockdowns likely against average opponents, and might start single-shotting even armored knights on a slightly better than average damage roll, even if the knight gets a shield, too. Heck, you can give that Saxon Knight a Great Axe, and he would do 10d6 (average 35) against a shielded opponent, practically guaranteed to take out most knights in a single hit (average 19 points past the armor, a major wound), too.

  6. #6
    I will agree that is a hard pill to swallow. But, also I think we need to examine that when KAP first started with all this, we were in 3rd edition? When King Arthur is safely on the throne? Many/Most knights have a wonderful bonus called Chivalry, that wonderful +3 points of armor that Saxons don't get. Add to that, the cavalry charge bonus where those with great axes must take a hit first.

    As time moved backward to the boy king, the anarchy, and Uther, these horses, armor and such become smaller and thinner making the Saxons more deadly, which kinda fits the helplessness that many Cymri felt against these warriors.

    The gm has a duty to fulfill in keeping things balanced, but I agree with Morien on the Wotanic and the RC. Always felt RC was a little weak compared to BC and Wotanic.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    2,870
    Quote Originally Posted by Hzark10 View Post
    I will agree that is a hard pill to swallow. But, also I think we need to examine that when KAP first started with all this, we were in 3rd edition? When King Arthur is safely on the throne? Many/Most knights have a wonderful bonus called Chivalry, that wonderful +3 points of armor that Saxons don't get. Add to that, the cavalry charge bonus where those with great axes must take a hit first.
    Oh, I agree that the +3 Chivalric is the Great Equalizer. And nothing to sneeze at when you are making 8d6 lance charges at +10 to Lance skill... Although I have to point out that by Romance, you generally fight other knights, not Saxons, since it is already over a decade after Badon.

  8. #8
    Oh, very true, but then I am one that differs in that I allow the bonus for all periods so it does affect Saxons

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Morien View Post
    Greg stated in BoK&L quite unequivocally that British Christian Cymric Knight is already 'minmaxed'. So no, I am not surprised that option comes head and shoulders before everyone else.

    However, I was comparing Wotanic +1d6 Damage to Roman Christian +6HP, and in that comparison, RC loses out to Wotanic, IMHO.
    +6 hp loses out to practically every other religious bonus. Extra Hit Points are nice, but don't help as much or last as long as any of the other bonuses. The Pagan extra healing rate is one of the better ones-at least if people are using the chirugery rules and taking the time to heal up. I think the +6hp suffer in a way because a character has to really get mauled for them to make much of a difference.

    +1d6 Damage is a huge advantage in a fight. Just look at the difference between 4d6 knight and 5d6 knight: The former often doesn't even trigger a Knockdown and the hits bounce off armor+shield, while 5d6 is chipping away at the enemy and most of the time, triggers a knockdown roll. 6d6 knight roughly triples the average damage past armor and shield compared to 5d6, and might even cause a Major Wound on a normal hit, if the opposing knight doesn't get a shield. A Wotanic Saxon Knight could even get 8d6 Damage in KAP 5.2, making automatic knockdowns likely against average opponents, and might start single-shotting even armored knights on a slightly better than average damage roll, even if the knight gets a shield, too. Heck, you can give that Saxon Knight a Great Axe, and he would do 10d6 (average 35) against a shielded opponent, practically guaranteed to take out most knights in a single hit (average 19 points past the armor, a major wound), too.
    Yes, and if Saxons fought mounted I think it would be much more significant than it is. IMO it's the Beserk/Uncontrolled Attack option that makes Wotanic so nasty. Yes the PKs will kill a lot of Saxons that try it, but the Saons are expendable.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •