Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

[Michael Hopcroft]

I am getting really desperate to see The Secret of Kells, an Irish animated film about the creation of the magnificent illustrated Bibles of the middle ages. In a large sense, the Book of Kells is Ireland, a symbol not only of religious faith but of tenacity in the face of adversity, fear and despair. And the film has a unique visual style based on the illustrations, even being filmed without the use of perspective (which had yet to be re-invented in medieval times).

 

The topic of the movie as I understand it is a young monk sent out into the world to collect berries for use in ink, and what he encounters on his journey -- including a lovely faerie girl who becomes an ally in his quest.

 

Which made me think of the possible roles of monks in Fantasy HERO. D&D has conditioned gamers top believe that only the Eastern tradition monks are interesting because they fight in such cool ways. However, we owe a large debt to the medieval monasteries of Europe, which were some of the greatest and safest repositories of knowledge during chaotic times. Monasteries are important places; PCs could easily be called upon to help protect them from, brigands, invaders and avaricious kings.

 

What about the monks themselves? Many of them never venture outside the grounds of the monastery. But although that makes them poor player-characters it doesn't make them useless. Monks become fonts of knowledge mundane, historical and even arcane. In a world where magic exists, one of the most obvious places to find information about it is a monastery and many monks will be practicing mages (depending on what their orders teach about magic.) Need to be healed of a deadly wound? Need a magical poison counteracted? The local monastery is there to help.

 

And, of course, in a fantasy society monks will frequently be among the intellectual elite, called upon whenever wisdom and intelligence is needed. The Brother Cadfael stories immediately come to mind -- a former warrior now wearing the tonsure who brings a vast array of life experience and intellectual savvy to the problems of keeping a monastery intact in a chaotic time of civil war.

 

So there's a lot that can be done with monasteries and monks.

[Curufea]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

Yep pretty much. What a lot of roleplayers fail to realise is that people can actually DO THINGS before they start "adventuring". Monks, or any other religious/cloistered type are very likely not to have been born into that seclusion, but to have had a life beforehand.

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

What about the monks themselves? Many of them never venture outside the grounds of the monastery. But although that makes them poor player-characters it doesn't make them useless.

 

No disrespect intended, but the "cloistered monk" which you seem to focus on here is only part of the monastic tradition in Europe. There were several orders of "warrior monks," well-trained and -armed militaristic orders which came to prominence during the Crusades in the Middle East; the first and most famous of these being the Knights Templar. A few of the most prominent orders are mentioned here: http://en.allexperts.com/q/European-History-670/Warrior-Monks.htm

 

Since you mention Ireland and the Book of Kells, it would be remiss not to bring up St. Brendan the Navigator, one of the early and most renowned Christian figures of Ireland, whose legendary seven-year voyage seeking the "Isles of the Blessed" inspired many similar folktales in western Europe. Some historians theorize that the land Brendan discovered was actually North America, which would make him and his companions the first Europeans to reach the New World, centuries ahead of the Vikings. Of course in fantasy, a voyage patterned after Brendan's could actually encounter mythic supernatural lands and creatures. Read more about the Navigator here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan

 

Monks become fonts of knowledge mundane' date=' historical and even arcane. In a world where magic exists, one of the most obvious places to find information about it is a monastery and many monks will be practicing mages (depending on what their orders teach about magic.) Need to be healed of a deadly wound? Need a magical poison counteracted? The local monastery is there to help.[/quote']

 

Hero Games's The Ultimate Mystic sourcebook describes "Hermetic Theurgy," the tradition of Western spellcraft that invokes the power of God and various angels, and the Jewish tradition of Kabbalism which contributed to Hermetic Theurgy. Although HT arose during the Renaissance, it would be a very appropriate magic style for spell-casting monks in a fantasy setting.

[Curufea]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

I've never equated Church Knight or the Holy Orders with Monks...

[Shadowsoul]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

I'd agree with Curufea on that one. Templars and Hospitallers etc were knights who chose to live like monks, (in theory), accepting strict discipline and the command of their grandmaster as well as a monastic lifestyle. In their pure form Templars were a real world equivalent of Paladins, though the reality did no always match their ideals.

 

I have thought about European/Christian style clergymen as characters. Their abilities would depend on their role but they would work best in a social campaign or as Demon hunters.

 

Monks were the guardians of literacy and would have all manner of strange and ancient knowledge as you've already noted. If anyone would have power over religious or any other kind of magic it would be them. Those of them drawn from a peasant background would likely be fairly fit, particularly if they became a lay brother, (certain orders such as the Cistercians allowed members to take partial vows and spend their days in labour rather than in prayer). Noble monks would have the abilities of a ruler. Any monk might have picked up some useful banking skills which could make them a party's treasurer or bargainer.

 

Note that a wandering Friar would have all sorts of skills that a classic cloistered monk might lack e.g. Survival, Navigation, Oratory, Persuasion. They could also have a Preaching Multipower which would allow them to terrorise their enemies and give bonuses to their allies. The threat of damnation carried a lot of weight in Medieval times. Some monks might also have preached to the local population and developed similar abilities.

 

The Cleric's classic ability to terrify or destroy unholy creatures would of course be highly appropriate. In addition to this a Monk would have a good chance of identifying any evil spirit that they encountered.

 

This one is a bit sneaky but historically certain members of the clergy have interpreted the rule against violence to mean that they should shed no blood. Maces and quarterstaffs were, by extension, ok.

 

Also, every Monk is in theory trying to become a Saint. Now Saints have all kinds of weird powers. Animal Friendship, Presence boosts, Transform, Dispel, (the heretical preacher Simon Magus was reputed to have been killed by two of the Disciples praying to God to turn his levitation power off).

 

And that power can be used secondhand, (no pun intended). Monks might possess powerful Relics which have the power to heal all manner of diseases, afflictions and injuries.

 

And any opponent who subscribes to the same faith as the Monk should be very reluctant to injure him as the consequences both temporal and spiritual would be extremely dire. Of course enemies from opposing faiths would cheerfully build bonfires out of 'heretical' Monks.

 

I was working on a Preaching Multipower a while back. It's not necessarily very practical for Player Characters but I'll have a look at it and see if I can polish it up.

[Markdoc]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

I've never equated Church Knight or the Holy Orders with Monks...

 

But that is, nonetheless, exactly what some of them were. Official monastic orders, with monastic charters and monastic vows. The most famous (Hospitallers and Templars) started out as exactly what we'd expect of a monastic order: they cared for the sick, fed and housed pilgrims and prayed. Initially, the Hospitallers followed the Monastic rule of St. Augustine It was only over time that they developed a more martial aspect (and a new rule - the Monastic rule of Raymond of Provence), but they didn't stop being monks (or drop their monastic vows and duties to house the sick and pilgrims). Indeed, we still have some cartularies (complied lists of monastic charters) from the Hospitallars: the oldest I know of dates from the 11th century and is in the museum at Limoges. It is clear from this that professed knights, were attached to the order by a perpetual vow, and enjoyed the same spiritual privileges as the other religious. In other words, they were monks. The Templars followed a very similar path, but started with the Cistercian rule: again, a monastic rule.

 

cheers, Mark

[DusterBoy]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

Read the "Cadfael" murder-mysteries by Ellis Peters. He's a Welshman who in middle age (or thereabouts) has retired from being a soldier (he's a veteran of the Crusades) to become a Benedictine monk, specifically the herbalist at Shrewsbury Abbey. However, underestimate him at your peril, because he's every bit as badass now as he was when he was a soldier. He acts as a doctor, a detective and a diplomat and his worldly skills and knowledge often get him into trouble with the more doctrinaire members of his abbey.

[Markdoc]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

Sorry for the double post

 

I meant to add that not all military orders were monastic - the catholic church officially recognizes both monastic (like for example, Templars, Teutonic, Hospitallar, Santiago, etc., together called the greater regular orders) and non-monastic (like for example the Sword Brethren, whose members were not required to take vows, and who generally fall into the lesser regular orders). In the monastic orders, the knights were regarded in the Church as monks, whose three vows they professed and whose immunities they shared - their orders' rules also bound the brethren to the exercises of the monastic life such as the recitation of the Hours, and prescribed their dress and their food, and their feast, abstinence, and fast days.

 

So yeah, monks. Monks with swords. Badass, fanatical, highly trained monks with swords! It's not just for the Yamabushi.

 

cheers, Mark

[Markdoc]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

As an irrelevant aside, I spent most of last month and a chunk of March, in Syria and Jordan, doing a tour up the old crusader border of Transjordan, hitting all the major crusader castles, en route, as well as some of the major castles of their allies and opponents. That naturally involved hitting many of the major sites of the military orders. Highly, highly recommended! It made a nice counterpoint to last Christmas' holiday in Malta, where we spent much time on the Hospitallars' later-period fortifications and buildings.

 

cheers, Mark

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

I was going to add that as a perk, monks could give you sanctuary. And since certain orders were transnational. They could be a route for the Pc to get into a country that wouldn't let them in otherwise.

[Markdoc]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

I was going to add that as a perk' date=' monks could give you sanctuary. And since certain orders were transnational. They could be a route for the Pc to get into a country that wouldn't let them in otherwise.[/quote']

 

Working along these lines, monastic orders can serve several plot-related roles, even if the PCs themselves are not monks.

 

1. International banking. Stop laughing! Some monastic orders set up some of the first international banks. You could dump your loot with an order and get a letter of credit which would let you draw on it with other chapter houses (usually you couldn't get much cash back out, but you could get lodging and services). Originally, this was service offered to pilgrims who might be away from home for years and didn't want to haul a big bag of coins with them. But as the orders grew, they ended up with large networks across Europe and even parts of asia, and merchants started using the system too. The orders also ended up with lots of land (the Templars, at one point had an estimated 19,000 manors in Europe, all funneling funds to support their castles and field troops, plus their charitable work in the holy land and along the pilgrimage routes).

 

This could be a handy way for PCs to get some use out of their loot, without having to carry it all. They could give the cash to the temple, and in fantasy world, later use their letter of credit to get healing, or spells cast for them, in addition to lodging and more mundane services.

 

2. Postal service. In medieval Europe, the vast network of hospitals, hostels, monasteries, mills, banks, chapels, castles and manors owned by the larger orders meant that they had factotums who were continually on the move, collecting rents, delivering cash, carrying orders. They served as an informal post system for those who could afford to pay to have messages transported. In a fantasy world, they might well have magical communication and transport options as well.

 

3. Safe lodging. Some of the networks referred to above was originally established by groups like the Templars to safeguard pilgrim routes. That meant armed guards traveling the routes and safe (often fortified) lodgings. When traveling outside established kingdoms, a string of hostelries might provide a safe route or short term base. Even less militant orders had hostelries

 

4. Patrons. Sure they are monks, but by the 13th century, many of the orders were powerful political players, and many so-called monks came from wealthy and influential families - and operated on their families' behalf. In addition to their own people, the orders hired mercenaries, spies, diplomats, merchants. They could use spies to sabotage a rival order's machinations, or the plan of a prince who opposed them. Internal rivalry was high too - you could end up working for one group in the order's hierarchy to sabotage the political ambitions of another group. You could take any Kazei 5 or shadowrun adventure, scrub out "corporation" and replace it with "order", swap "Mr Johnson" with "Brother John" and you're basically ready to go. Just like in that sort of setting, if you are discovered, the order will disavow any knowledge of your existence, etc.

 

It's easy enough to generate simple hack n' slash adventures too. You could end up as short term crusaders fighting alongside the order's warrior monks, or as the main military force alongside a group of missionaries, or as guards on a pilgrim ship, or freelance pirates operating against the infidel, under the order's flag (the Genoese in particular did this) or as messengers carrying important papers that the order wanted plausible deniability.

 

5. Opponents. Monastic orders make good long term opponents, too - if you PO the church hierarchy, you've just made an influential enemy with lots of people, lots of cash, agents everywhere and often a fanatically-devoted military arm. I leave the rest to the GM's imagination.

 

cheers, Mark

[Lord Liaden]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

Monasteries may also be the keepers of valuable items or resources which PCs have to acquire or consult, protect from those who wish to steal them, or even steal themselves: unique grimoires or maps; potent artifacts beneficial or malevolent; rare plants with extraordinary properties (historically, monastic horticulturalists often bred new species).

[Manic Typist]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

...I really want to start worldbuilding again and build this sort of stuff in there.

[assault]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

Monks can be missionaries and bishops.

 

Monks can be secular rulers, too.

 

PS: Way back when I was a programmer, we sometimes referred to the manufacturer's "Known Error List", aka the "KEL". And yes, I made jokes about it being the Book of Kells, and that in a fantasy world, a sacred text with that title would be a serious thing indeed.

[Ninja-Bear]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

Did anyone see the History Channel special on the real Robin Hood. It said that they have a manuscript depicting a monk teaching buckler techniques. Now the expert did say that the monk probaly came from the crusades. I'm itching to make some templars now. Or should I call them crusaders?

[Markdoc]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

Did anyone see the History Channel special on the real Robin Hood. It said that they have a manuscript depicting a monk teaching buckler techniques. Now the expert did say that the monk probaly came from the crusades. I'm itching to make some templars now. Or should I call them crusaders?

 

That's an odd document called the Tower manuscript - the earliest known western swordfighting manual, from around 1300. It's odd because it appears to be a manual written for civilians and also because it is thought it was written by a monk. Finally, it's also odd because it's so much earlier than the other fighting manuals, so it stands by itself: the first reference to it we have is nearly 300 years later and it doesn't reference any other books: it's like a monk in Germany without any direct combat experience, suddenly decided to write a combat manual, which was afterwards ignored by everyone for over a century - the next combat manuals we have are clearly renaissance and teach quite a different style.

 

However, it's open to question how much military training said monk had: several of the techniques turn out to be nearly physically impossible to perform. Others - like dropping your weapons when you are clinched - are both stupid and potentially fatal in combat. It's also pretty unlikely the monk had been a crusader (though not impossible) - by 1300 the age of crusades had pretty much passed. The author is pretty clearly german and the last German crusade had ended nearly 80 years before the book was written. It's not impossible, of course: the author could have gone crusading with a non-german group, or been on a northern crusade with one of the German orders.

 

However the best explanation I have seen is that German Ecclesiastic courts at the time allowed trial by combat - so the book was written to provide guidance to monks and students (both of whom are depicted in the instructions) in how to fight with sword and buckler. In this case the author had probably seen real combat - he might also have seen judicial duels - even if he had no direct combat experience himself. That would explain the few odd techniques, the odd choice of subjects used to illustrate the techniques and the fact that it was left out of the mainstream for so long - but also explain why it was written and why so much of it is good sense.

 

As for Templars (crusaders is a generic term: anyone, even a peasant who went on crusade was called a crusader) they not only had formal weapons training, but had training in maneuver, responding to signals and rudimentary training in what we now call logistics and fortification - all considered innovations at the time. In addition, we know that the Hospitallers (and probably the Templars as well) did a lot of strength training. For example, the Hospitallers on Rhodes were required to own two suits of armour: one for training, one for combat. The training one was nearly twice the weight of the combat one. This not only made it slightly safer for training - the heavy armour reduced the chance of injury while sparring - but most importantly, it meant that the combat armour felt light and easy to move in by comparison. This heavy armour was not only used for sparring but for exercise - riding, route-marching and one particularly hated exercise - climbing up and down ladders - useful for siege!

 

The result was that even compared to regular crusader knights, the military orders were badasses - considered by some chroniclers to be worth 6 times their number of secular knights.

 

cheers, Mark

[Michael Hopcroft]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

That's an odd document called the Tower manuscript - the earliest known western swordfighting manual, from around 1300. It's odd because it appears to be a manual written for civilians and also because it is thought it was written by a monk. Finally, it's also odd because it's so much earlier than the other fighting manuals, so it stands by itself: the first reference to it we have is nearly 300 years later and it doesn't reference any other books: it's like a monk in Germany without any direct combat experience, suddenly decided to write a combat manual, which was afterwards ignored by everyone for over a century - the next combat manuals we have are clearly renaissance and teach quite a different style.

 

However, it's open to question how much military training said monk had: several of the techniques turn out to be nearly physically impossible to perform. Others - like dropping your weapons when you are clinched - are both stupid and potentially fatal in combat. It's also pretty unlikely the monk had been a crusader (though not impossible) - by 1300 the age of crusades had pretty much passed. The author is pretty clearly german and the last German crusade had ended nearly 80 years before the book was written. It's not impossible, of course: the author could have gone crusading with a non-german group, or been on a northern crusade with one of the German orders.

 

However the best explanation I have seen is that German Ecclesiastic courts at the time allowed trial by combat - so the book was written to provide guidance to monks and students (both of whom are depicted in the instructions) in how to fight with sword and buckler. In this case the author had probably seen real combat - he might also have seen judicial duels - even if he had no direct combat experience himself. That would explain the few odd techniques, the odd choice of subjects used to illustrate the techniques and the fact that it was left out of the mainstream for so long - but also explain why it was written and why so much of it is good sense.

 

Sounds like there is just enough information in that manuscript to get someone killed. Sort of like The Anarchist's Cookbook in that sense. I imagine there were a lot of ritualistic activities surrounding a Trial by Combat that had little to do with the actual fight. And how often were these combats to the death anyway?

[Markdoc]

Re: Secret of Kells and Monks in Campaigns

 

Sounds like there is just enough information in that manuscript to get someone killed. Sort of like The Anarchist's Cookbook in that sense. I imagine there were a lot of ritualistic activities surrounding a Trial by Combat that had little to do with the actual fight. And how often were these combats to the death anyway?

 

Well, if someone got killed, clearly god was indicating that his opponent had a good case

 

However I shouldn't have given the impression the manuscript was entirely useless - far from it. It has some failings that suggest the person who wrote it was not an experienced combatant, but at the same time it's mostly full of good advice, and back then that was rare. If you had to fight a judicial duel and you weren't professional military, it's likely that you would know little to nothing about how to fight with a sword and shield. And it's not like you could pick up a book or find a sword teacher - there weren't any books, prior to this manuscript, and sword teachers were also rare or non-existent. As I have commented in the past, the idea that martial skills were something that could or should be systematically taught was actually kind of foreign to european thought of the time: it didn't really evolve until later when you started to get professional militaries composed of non-nobles.

 

So in that context a basic primer on combat could be a life saver. That said, judicial duels were never "to the death" - the whole point was to settle a legal debate, not a defence of honour, and killing a defeated party would prove nothing apart from the fact that you were a bad winner. The records we have of judicial duels showed that the rules were pretty flexible: that's a polite way of saying "usually made up on the spot". Thomas, Duke of Gloucester, and Royal Constable wrote detailed rules for judicial duels during the reign of Richard II: but what records we have from that period indicate that people tended to simply ignore him. If the parties employed champions - which they often did - those might possess armour. But if they didn't, a judicial duel could easily be fatal, even if the parties weren't trying to kill each other. To avoid this, some judicial duels (such as the one between Engelardus and the monks of Saint-Serge of Angers) employed clubs instead of swords.

 

As for ritualistic behaviour, here's Thomas' rules and a great deal of pointless ritual it all was.

 

cheers, Mark