lol - I figured! (Though being bought up in Cornwall, there is a certain dislike for Anglo Saxons endemic in my upbringing)
Gah! I was really hoping that I could get a new ipad in a couple of weeks and get back to having access to your character sheets, but the ipad pro 3 has curved corners - which in real terms means a smaller, lower resolution screen and no 3.5mm jack - which means no monitor headphones - and that means it will be useless for video editing. Unless the 2 comes down in price, I’m going to have to stick with the two I’ve got, and they are working flat out right now!
As much as I love the workflow on ipad, making it worth the time I spend transferring my files across, apple may end up pushing me back to windows!
(Dude, switch to Android)
I’m not one to get involved in tech wars - when asked what console I prefer, my answer is always “shrug, all of em” - when asked which operating system I prefer, it’s “Workbench first, BeOS next, then the others each have their uses and strengths”
When it comes to phones & tablets, it’s much the same. I can’t “switch” to android because I already use android! But I also already use ios. They are both great in their own ways.
Apple’s strength, that is relevant to video editing is it’s tight control over it’s hardware and software integration. Yes it means that the ecosystem is inbred on the system - every browser for example is a reskin of safari but it means that LumaFusion (Urgh, come back web2.0 names, all is forgiven) - my current video editing software of choice outperforms da Vinci Resolve on my threadripper 2 windows machine. And I never thought I would say this… touch is better than mouse and keyboard for this kind of editing. Hokusai 2 - an audio editing program (I will use the wordstub “app” when hell freezes over) started this for me, and that’s overtaken audacity simply because the process of using touch to edit is better! LumaFusion uses the same UI style, it just works!
If you can find a video editing software package that comes in under £2000 (including hardware to run it - which needs a screen of similar size, 2.5k ish resolution and wide enough gamut) on android that encodes 4k video faster than real time (at a minimum - davinci get’s 3.9 times faster, lumafusion gets about 4.2 times faster), and does not delay every time you edit while it processes that edit (it has to do that in the background) I will be all over it! While it doesn’t exist, I have to stick with what gets the job done
Primary Commander rolls Battle for an initial Tactics modifier.
Rounds of melee combat then proceed for PKs, normal combat rules. Tactics modifier is used in the first round of combat. Skirmish ends when situation involving the PKs are resolved. (In Progress)
Every character leading men then rolls Battle (overall commander and unit commanders). This decides the outcome of the skirmish at both the unit and complete command level.
Ok. Sorry if I lost track of things.
Been busy and lost how visually these things are going on.
I do not remember movement rates rules, and I do not know how many rounds you need to do 20 yards while mounted (I’m out, no access to the books).
Leddicus will detach when he judge he can do the lateral charge in the same round as he detached (If such a thing is mechanically possible).
(sorry for this aside everybody, I’ll let you get back to it)
I love you, man.
OK, I ask this here, so not to disrupt the flow of the adventure…
@SleepyWill : are you sure using archers from a besieged castle really is a breach of honour? (or a breach of whatever other knightly ideal).
I mean, off course bows are NOT knightly weapons, and knights refrain from using them…but allowing peasant archers doing your job from inside the castle: is it conceivable?
After all it is a decent way to protect from siege!
I just did a VERY QUICK (so this means MAYBE TOO QUICK, I could have missed things…) read through the KAP 5.2 pdf and I could not find instances of using bows = losing honour (albeit, off course there’s general disdain of using bows by knights).
Is this a Mallory thing? (And again, I profess here my ignorance on Malory!)
I ask about it, especially regarding the Age of Uther, which seems way less chivalrous and more practical/down to the earth in terms of violence/warfare.
In 5.2, it’s under ranged weapons:
Only cowards fight from a distance (tick to cowardly) and personal honour requires men to confront each other body to body.
The glory gained from defeating an opponent using ranged attacks is always 1/10 normal, regardless of whether melee combat was also part of the victory or not.
OK! I must have been blind!
But still, using peasant archers to defend from castle…it’s more a necessity of war, or at least I guess.
I have very specific views on societal changes along the timeline of the campaign, and I don’t want to get into them because of spoilers - but suffice to say, I think social change is one of the themes of the campaign and Le Morte d’Arthur and I don’t think either of them shy away from the idea that change brings positives and negatives.
Regarding chivalry, I don’t think its any secret that Uther’s era is more brutal and as a man he is controlling and severe, but I don’t agree that he is a savage, or any less chivalrous than any once and future kings you might wish to compare him too, I think the Uther era exists to set the standard, the normal - this is what society is and how it works - and this is to highlight how extraordinary the time of the stories is, what a microcosm it is and why it is worthy of the stories.
I don’t agree that chivalry doesn’t exist in Uthers era, I think he strongly enforces chivalry - hence what you are all doing in Cornwall right now. The code was broken, and no matter the morals, or the ethics, the context or the circumstances, this spells punishment for the Duke.
That’s not to say I believe Chivalry doesn’t exist later, but that it changes and here I shall stop because I want you all to experience my take on this campaign through play!
I’m not sure I buy that ordering a peasant archer to fire on a knight is any different to firing on a knight yourself - and I am reminded that the book of the battle outlines both feudal armies and all knight armies, leaving the ball firmly in my court as to whether I use one or the other. One is more accurate to Mallory, one is more accurate to history! I guess I haven’t yet made that decision!
The line of reasoning can be stressed in many ways, and maybe one must careful not to exagerate in order to come to absurd situations… so no peasant archers in armies, otherwise whoever control them is not honorable…and at the end of the day, their feudal lords who summon them as levy can be doing something dishonorable…
I feel that stressing one way or the other it’s very tricky!!
I agree, and that’s why I would quite like to see the material made up for book of the castle, just to get a hint of which way to go!
Well…that’s a way to look at it!
The other is that maybe he is exploiting the knigthly customs/feudal obligations since his head is filled by lust/passions toward a certain illicit love …
But I guess that this is the kind of contradictions which make Pendragon interesting.
It’s always them!
I am assuming that the van- and rearguard battles switch to left and right wings when facing the enemy?
Yes, like at Lindsey
I assume peasant archers are used against non-honorable opponents just as Cynian can semi-freely use his bow against dishonorable enemies. (As an aside, I really appreciate that you haven’t enforced that 1/10th rule although if Cynian ever misuses his bow I ask that you do)
Hiding in castles and sieging the enemy are both acceptable ways to deal with dishonorable opponents. Both leaders see themselves as faultless with the other breaking the laws of chivalry and so they treat each other as dishonorable enemies even if their armies still view the knights they face in combat as honorable.