Home Videos Games Podcastle

Discuss: SUSD Forum: The Great Pendragon Campaign


Cool, thankyou!


When I have some time, I’ll add what gives ticks to each manor.


The top post will be updated soon… Things have been hectic…


The situation is now a bit more complicated for those of us with estates, since estates do not automatically mean a specific number of manors, but rather a certain amount of £ of lands including manors and other stuff…

By the way since 490 the situation is as follows:

Woodford Estate
composed by:

  • The whole Underditch hundred exluding £ 3 of land endowment to the Roman Christian Church and £ 2.6 of land (Oakscamp / Oaks Ford Pagan site, patroned by Earl Roderick)

  • Caput of the Estate: Woodford Manor (Residence of Leddicus and site of the local Court Moot) which has:
    BASICLarge Wooden Hall (DV 2).
    Jousting Arena (not far from the Woodford manor, not built by Leddicus but he found it there).
    Small Roman Christian Church to St. Peter (built by Leddicus in 489)
    Apiary/Melisarium (built by Leddicus in 488)

  • 2nd Manor: Hiddenford: BASIC Large Wooden Hall (DV 2)


Also excluding Sarum


Well as far as I remember…Sarum is not in Underditch!
Underditch borders Sarum (although the scale of the map may suggest differently), but maybe I should check!


This is from Book of the Warlord…and now that I look at it, I feel I’m confused…
I’m not sure whether Sarum is in Underditch, Barehill or Alder but, given that it is the caput of the whole Earl’s Honour, I guess Sarum is its own special thing!


This is Underditch hundred, as you can see, the Rock (Marked here as “Old Sarum”) is indeed clearly within it’s borders:


I love a good map.


@SleepyWill I made calculations with the assumptions that Sarum was not counted in it, since I did not realize that.
I started from Warlord page 112 which says that the total Render for Underditch is £49.6 and start subtracting stuff from that total.

2 things:

  1. For the sake of simplicity: can we leave that £49.6 as total EXCLUDING Sarum?
    It will make my life easier to make calculations and keep the total value at £50…

  2. Since most of the Hundred is under Woodford estate I included the Court profits from the Underditch Court (again, to make UP to the Total of £50).
    Again, for the sake of simplicity, should we leave the hundred Court there?
    Furthermore, if we leave it there, it maybe makes sense for Leddicus official position (Legal authority…but just counsel to the Earl, and direct authority only over a minor, hundred court).
    Off course, legal stuff in Sarum are not under Undeditch court, they are the Earl’s stuff, unless you rule otherwise.


The numbers will all stay the same, obviously, your estate hasn’t changed in value, you’ve just got a second circle on it that is not under your authority, no different to the druids camp.

Set aside your official position for now, that’s irrelevant when it comes to the administration of the hundred, the Earl has authority over all of them, no matter where they are, and has the right to sit in on any moot, though he rarely does - but more likely too when he can look out of his window and see things he wants to change than if they are happening across the county.

The City of Sarum is under the administration of the Bishop of Salisbury, not the Earl - he holds The Rock, the castle in Sarum.

Your moot is in a place called Œt Aſene - which is in Sarum itself, so it’s not likely you hold your moot in a place that is not administered by said moot.


Is this something peculiar (e.g. they lost them?), and therefore is it a telltale sign of something odd which happened to them?
Or are they maybe equipped not with swords but only with spears/javelins and therefore no scabbards?

The Great Pendragon Campaign Part 2

This is a common trait among mercenary companies, not only as a visible sign that they are always ready to fight - important when you have lost all social status and the protections that come with that, but also as a mark of social status, and the rejection of the norm.


It sounds odd for professional soldiers to do that (scabbards are cheaper than the expensive swords, they make your blade last longer…and more comfortable to wear!) but I guess that this a clue of the desperation of these men…

Leddicus mentally takes note of this detail, in case a talk will happen, their desperation must be taken into account.
These are men in need, no decent, disciplined Roman warrior should go aroung this way!


This is very untrue, if the quality of the scabbard is matched to the quality of the weapon, the scabbard costs 2-3 times more.

This is also untrue, they tend to hold water and the wood swells and shrinks with the weather, causing pretty drastic forces on the comparatively brittle metal.

Leddicus would also know that it is all about social status and nothing to do with desperation at all. Even the richest mercenary company would be the same.


I respectfully disagree with all the above assumptions.

But OK, I get it: these men are not desperates, my assumptions were wrong in your version of Pendragon.


“for the scabbard is worth ten of the sword”

– Words of Merlin, Sir Thomas Malory, Le Morte d’Arthur

“Malory’s book (Le Morte d’Arthur) is the primary textual source for much of the King Arthur Pendragon Campaign”

– Greg Stafford, King Arthur Pendragon Edition 5.2


I confess myself ignorant of Malory!


This is more archaeological/antiquarian discussion, rather than actual play, so I post it here!

Off course you are right and I’m wrong in this game.
This is Malory Pendragon, not real history.
I’m making this post just for the fun of the discussion.

I do not consider myself a great expert in ancient weaponry, but I have professional interest in them, especially since I happened to have dug a certain number of swords, shortswords and other weapons from pre-roman burials here in Italy (Late 7th- 2nd century BC, mostly).

Furthermore, as you can see from my profile image, I take part each year in a 6th century AD military Late Roman/Early Byzantine re-enactment where there are various scholars on the matter giving their expertise to the organizers…although I’m NOT one one them!
I’m just a classical archaeologist who has fun playing the role of the Late Roman general or “Comes” (which is the equivalent of “Count”).

Off course this does NOT mean that I’m an authority on Late Roman / Early Migration period swords in Britannia…and even if I was one, my eventual knowledges can be even be wrong in Pendragon which, off course, is “Mallory King Arthur”.

So, given this premise…

Scabbards can be crafted in many different materials (not just metal, even much cheaper stuff), and the fact that the majority of ancient blades that we have (from Preroman and Roman times in Europe) that are preserved as archaeological finds lack a scabbard, could even mean that most of them were organic with few metal bits.

Off course I’m making HUGE generalizations here, especially since I’m ignoring the variety of local cultures/regions and the possible differences of contexts (preserved swords mostly come from tombs as a result of funerary ritual, not battle sites, which are very rare to identify on the field).

Off course scabbards can be expensive due to the amount of decorative work needed…but please remind that many scabbards that we have from Antiquity are usually the best ones, with a certain amount of decorated metal.

One point: I know I may be biased by my background/experience.
I’m sure that tin/copper to be used for decoration is in Britannia much cheaper than it is, for example, here in Italy. But, by the way, even so it cannot be as cheap as the crafted iron/steel sword (and let not start going into the Roman “iron or steel” discussion which is another huge can of worms…).

I confess my ignorance here.
But, if there’s one thing that my job taught me, is that the Rich, the Wealthy and the Elite are always A LOT more visible in archaeology (and even in Literary sources) than more common peoples/ basic warriors.
So sometimes we make assumptions about general trends, but basing them on the evidence about a restricted/special sample of persons.
And, stragely enough, this is true in many different cultures / periods.

I firmly guess that Malory is speaking about the swords of wealthy Knights of the 15th century, which is what he knew of weapons.
That was a time where common levy soldiers usually did not wield swords, which were not mass-produced but (as far as I know) were reserved for elite warriors (the knights!).

I doubt that the same assumption can be applied to Roman legions, a part from officers. Roman imperial swords were mass-produced and practicality was more important than decoration for the common soldier.

But, again, this is Malory Pendragon, not normal Romans.
So I’m sure that I am wrong!

To be frank, I’ve also read about the opposite be true, with scabbards protecting the blades.
But I also guess that what you say it’s mainly for warriors which are not professional enough (or do not have time) to frequently clean the blade, as most professional legionary soldiers should do…

But let ignore this “Protection of the blade” argument.
I may be wrong or not.

I feel that the most important argument about not wearing a scabbard is: where do you put your sword while you travel?
You cannot WALK (not ride like knights!!) for miles and miles with a drawn sword: it will tire you.
And this is especially true if you go around not just with a sword, but also with a shield, which remains the most cumbersome piece of equipment that you have to bring around (although there are reconstructions of Legionaries with shields on their backs, I do not know how much realistic they are).
Spears, even if longer, are more comfortable to bring around (you rest them on the shoulder, and you get some balance from the long shaft).

But swords are troublesome if you are a walking army.

This is NOT a problem for those which do not travel a lot: occasional warriors or stationary warriors or seasonal warriors which dress for war just for a few hours of battle and then go home (like, for example, the Greek hoplites in Hanson " Western Way of War", but whose conditions can be true also for other historical contexts).

But mercenaries and/or Roman legionaries need to walk a lot with the weapons on…so I’m respectfully doubtful that they can afford not using scabbards.

Again: all the comments above are MY OWN ideas based on my own knowledge of the real world (which may even be faulty).
It does not mean that they are valid for this game which, off course, is inspired by Malory and by Will’s judgement!


Just on this point, and I can’t read your full post properly just yet, but this jumped out - the tradition of resting a rifle on your shoulder as you march - if you are a modern soldier comes from the tradition of mercenaries resting their weapons, including swords on their shoulder as they marched.




As the swords used in Pendragon are arming swords, weighted just above the hilt, they rest quite nicely, hands free in the crook of your shoulder, with only a light touch needed to keep it there as you march, and in British and Irish history, there is evidence of a tradition of mercenaries keeping a weapon on their shoulder precisely for the reasons I gave - social status - and while it’s possible to argue that not having a scabbard is slightly detrimental to being a mercenary, it’s equally easy to argue that being a soldier was hampered by the need to wear decorations on a helmet that provide no additional protection, and yet it was done.