The Noted Knights of Westeros

[Lord Rhodri Arryn]

Selwyn, but he's dead. He never jousted. I don't think of some of my various Blackshields as jousters, but they are quite minor. All of my knights at least know how to joust, but when describing knight NPCs I usually try and imply what they might be best at ("known as a great horseman", or "massive and famed for his axe" usually makes it clear.)

[theother]

Famed for his axe?
Are talking about the Knight of Diamonds again?

[Lord Rhodri Arryn]

If you don't know which of my NPCs is famed for his axe by now, I'm accusing you of never actually reading any of my posts or scenarios and just skimming to "results".

Though I'm glad the Knight of Diamonds has made such an impression in such a short time.

[theother]

ramidel said:

Alright, I'll agree with this.

Out of curiosity, what combatants (PC or any NPC whose skills have been put on the line) -do- we have who are not jousters?

Aerie Blackwood
Aranya Royce
Aethan Stone

Anyone aside from all those A's?

I would imagine the amount of jousters in the Iron Islands could be counted on the hand of a bad Finger Dancer. Having said that, one or two pariahs do follow the Seven so their offspring might but they are a rare breed.

[Lord Rhodri Arryn]

I think common sense will really cover most questions on who is or who isn't a jouster, with the admins here to judge it if players are advocating something debatable.

[Princess Ariel Targaryen]

Yeah. Seth being among those pariahs, but calling him an ironborn is really being technical.

[Horas]

I think the easiest way to decide this is to say that all knights and highborn men from the Seven Kingdoms should have their jousting and fighting skills split. Lowborn men would generally not know how to use a lance, nor would women fighters. Ironborn would be another exception, unless noted otherwise.

This does raise the question of what to do with people who already have a lance skill, though.

[Deleted]

I planned on splitting Brynden's jousting and fighting skills when he grew up. I agree with Horas, because it makes sense to me. Jousting is a knightly form of combat, and it has to be distinguished so not everyone can use it.

[theother]

Personally, I think this is a lot of fuss for a skill which would only be used for tourneys or (perhaps) mounted combat. I also think it's a somewhat sneaky way to get another skill for "free" as it were.

I'll go with the Smith's recommendation (and based on past threads he seems to be leaning towards having some sort of separate skill for this).

[Lord Rhodri Arryn]

theother said:

Personally, I think this is a lot of fuss for a skill which would only be used for tourneys or (perhaps) mounted combat. I also think it's a somewhat sneaky way to get another skill for "free" as it were.

As I said, it actually penalizes the current knights in that they essentially got two for one leveling: anytime their sword skill went up, so did their jousting. While a good swordsman will end up a good jouster with this change, going forward they'll have to earn any advancement. And we'll see greater diversity of skills as a result, especially with newer characters having to decide if they want to emphasize jousting skill, or not bother -- and then miss out on the fun of jousting.

As for more mounted combat, expect to see some soon with Rhodri in the Vale. We still have some enemies to flush out.

BTW, while I gave Yohn a provisional, "once he grows up" rank in Sword & Axe, he will have no jousting skill. I'm not piggybacking him in on this. So add him to the Aerie/Aranya/Ironborn list of nonjousters.

[sercoletyrell]

Personally I agree with the Other, jousting is only a fun little side game, may aswell keep it as is.

Also, jousting isn't the type of thing one always thinks to add when creating a character. Someone new might want to make a great and famous knight but would forget to add in jousting and then they're stuck without it which wouldn't be fair seeing how the rest of us would have gotten our jousting skill so easily.

Unless all new people were allowed to start with a jousting skill of at least apprentice or noteworthy, and seperate from the skills they choose.

[Lord Rhodri Arryn]

sercoletyrell said:

Personally I agree with the Other, jousting is only a fun little side game, may aswell keep it as is.

But it shouldn't be. Jousting was one of the preeminent skills of knighthood. And while any mercenary can pick up a sword, knights were the great cavaliers whose crashing line of lances would break their foes in battle.

Anyone who makes a knight character and doesn't bother with a jousting skill is being pretty silly.

[Horas]

I think it will be a good change. Right now jousting skills are pretty pointless, since sword skills (or whatever your weapon of choice is) basically supercede them. It would be nice if they had some relevance.

[sercoletyrell]

bazzle said:

Anyone who makes a knight character and doesn't bother with a jousting skill is being pretty silly.

There have been a lot of silly people who played this game then.

[Lord Rhodri Arryn]

Yup! And I'm often the silliest. Well, it's hard to top Mad Alister for silliness, but I've had my moments.

In any case, all I'm arguing is that jousting should be a relevant skill in a game where a lot of the characters are mounted knights. As long as it tags along with principal weapon skill, it won't be. And if people want their knights not to be good jousters, that's their choice.

Loras Tyrell is a great jouster and good sword; Garlan is a great sword and a lesser jouster. And the story is better for differentiating them. We should do the same.