Spear vs Knights... am I missing something?

[Donny Brook]

Originally Posted by Kromm

To be fair, there's absolutely such a thing as a cheap knight:

They have Wealthy [20], Status 2 [5] (of which one level comes from Wealth), a Duty in the 9 or less [-5] to 12 or less [-10] range, and a couple of points in each of Area Knowledge (Demesne), Broadsword, Diplomacy, Lance, Leadership, Riding, Shield, and Savoir-Faire (High Society). They're about a 30- to 35-point character.

A fit knight might raise ST and HT, the cost somewhat offset by various self-imposed codes about being a rah-rah warrior type, and perhaps things like missing eyes and hands. A really good one would of course have Tactics, high attributes, and combat skills better than 10.

But mostly they just need the Status and Wealth, which in many (maybe most) times and places weren't earned through valor, but through being in the right family: "Right, you're the first son and next Baron Whatsit, and the rest of you lot are knights. Go forth and ride horses or whatever." The idea that all knights were competent heavy cavalrymen is as idealistic as the idea that all knights obeyed the codes of romantic chivalry. Scutage goes back to the 12th century, at least, and its existence is basically the equivalent of saying the most important attributes of a knight are loyalty and paying the bills on time.

Sure, if your concept of knight includes superannuated actors and popular musicians.

I mean professional fighting men, expected to earn their keep by being ready to throw down against hard living outlaws or equally equipped peers.

A vision of some rich guy with a couple of points in Broadsword, Lance and RIding (i.e. skill level 10 unless you've neglected to mention high DX) is either a child still in training or a senior citizen.