creativehum

Hello @jhilahd, I believe the +5 modifier is a hypothetical. The source is indeterminant and does not matter. I think the phrasing is a bit off. Try this reading: "Always compare the roll against the final, modified value of the Statistic. For example, if a Skill with a value of 6 receives a +5 modifier for a final value of 11, a die result of 11 now scores a critical, while a result of 6 (which would have been a critical without the modifier) now counts as a regular success." Does that work for you? Also, I hope your group turns around! Playing Pendragon is one of the best things in the world!

Another question! Is the game line now called Pendragon rather than King Arthur Pendragon? Not a big deal to me either way, but I'm curious!

@MOB I know you all have a long rollout of Pendragon products for months and months to come, but I'm curious if there adjustments to the Book of Feasts and the Book of Feasts Cards are in the works. I've never bought them, but they are on my wish list. But if a new set is coming out in the future, I'll wait until then! Thanks!

Looking good!

Thanks so much!

I went to Lulu to order POD copies of Cults of Prax and Cults of Terror -- and could not find either of the sight. I know they used to be there, but it has been a while since I saw them. Are they coming back? Gone for good?

Hello @Jeff, It's a small thing, but I wanted to thank you of the thoughtful and nuanced presentation of the Lunar Way you have presented in this thread. Really appreciated!

Even d6s are not as common in households as they used to be (in the days of my youth, at least) so getting d20s and d6s into the box for Arthurian lovers who accidentally pick up the game might be a good idea.

Thanks for the reference. (Sincerely.) I had found that myself, before -- and it might well be accurate. I was looking for the official statement from Chaosium. I'm sure it will be revealed soon.

@MOB can you share details about what will be in the box? Thanks!

Also, will the seminar be recorded? (and maybe even the game sessions? portions thereof? I'd love to get a chance to see you running the game.)

Hi @Ian Cooper the links above lead to 404 errors Cheers Christopher

Hi all, Every time I think I've got a handle on how conflict resolution (and task resolution -- sometimes?) I run a moment of gameplay in my head and get all confused all over again. Can anyone point me to any examples of actual play using the rules on YouTube or podcasts from people who know how to make the system sing? Greatly appreciated!

I remember this being mentioned a while back, I forgot which book/adventure it was. I think it was a Jonstown project. But I do know people praising the fact that it came up with a clever way of providing/summing up/some method the stats for NPCs and creatures without having to do the whole shebang? Does anyone remember/know which book I'm talking about?

Exciting news!

I wanted to say quickly that I appreciate all the thought and effort people are putting into this thread.

Thanks @SaxBasilisk for the post. For clarity, I don't think the issue for my players (and this one specific player) is "Characters Behaving Badly." In fact, she has made it clear that she's fine with that. The nub of the issue would have been having to fight for Uther, knowing that Uther is ultimately on a path to rape Ygraine. It is the aiding and abetting of Uther's actions that I think was too much for her. She doesn't what to have to be loyal to a character that she simply has such terrible reaction to in such a moral, emotional, and visceral way.

Hi @merlyn, I wasn't trying to ignore anything you typed, but rather make an argument that contained all my points in one post. As for Madoc: I agree with you completely about the situation with Syagrius. I disagree with you about Madoc and Gorlois however: arguing about "proprieties" (the state or quality of conforming to conventionally accepted standards of behavior or morals) is exactly about Uther being wrong. In fact, I think Greg set up the Syagrius incident to stand in contrast to the situation with Ygraine: betraying Syagrius is something Madoc can get behind; everything Uther is doing regarding Ygraine is, for Madoc, too much. From my reading, everything in the GPC points to the notion that Uther pursuing Ygraineis completely f***ed up from every angle you look at it. As for whether or not it would have been wiser not to the make the alliance with Syagrius: then they would not have gotten the treasure! This was where the PKs really took a step back from Uther. Uther is clearly ready to give his word in order to break it to take advantage of someone. Again, I think it is all set up to make it clear Uther is not a fit king and the PKs would be well to consider what they think about his behavior. (Which the text of the GPC explicitly asks them to do.) So I'm a bit harsher in this than you in that I believe Uther knew what the end result would be and made the commitment anyway.

First I want to thank @Voord 99 for catching on to what I was talking about and highlighting that. Second, if folks want to somehow see Uther in a "good" light -- great! However, if we look at the two key sources I'm working from for a King Arthur Pendragon game (Le Morte D'Arthur and the Great Pendragon Campaign) there's not much upside for Uther. In terms of Le Morte D'Arthur the first thing that happens in the tale is Uther rapes Igraine. That's it. Full stop. That's not a "modern" interpretation. That's simply what happens. Rape is a crime in Le Morte D'Arthur, and it is clear that Uther, aided by Merlin's magic, rapes Igraine. The player I mentioned in the first post started reading Le Morte D'Arthur, realizes quite clearly what Uther does, and realized this was the lord she was supposed to be loyal to (at least through Roderick, who is loyal to Uther) and balked. There's nothing shifty or something that needs to be justified to have this reaction. It's a perfectly reasonable reaction. It isn't a "modern" reaction, and it is, in fact, completely in keeping with the text and spirit of the Great Pendragon Campaign. We know this because the GPC goes out of its way to paint Uther as a bad king. In the first instance we know that when Uther made his bid to become High King after his brother's funeral, many of the lords leave immediately after the funeral, robbing Uther of a chance for a vote and confirmation. This despite the fact that having a High King to help unify Britain against the Saxons might be very helpful. Yes, some of this might be chalked up to competing ambitions by these nobles, but the fact is others leave because they don't trust Uther to be the High King. This lack of trust is supported by the text. Through the Uther Phase the text makes it clear that Uther's efforts to become High King stretch his resources when he has to deal with the Saxons. Later, he holds both the duke and duchess prisoner (in a very polite way). This despite the fact that Duke Gorlois made peace with Uther and was instrumental in defeating the Saxons at the Battle of Lindsey despite his utter lack of trust of Uther. Let's make a mental note her: Gorlois' distrust of both Uther and Merlin is utterly warranted as revealed by the later actions of Uther and Merlin. By the time Uther is marching toward Cornwal to seize Ygraine, the GPC makes several things clear: Uther is marching off without the army assembled, telling other nobles to arrive as soon as they can. He is being reckless at this point Prince Madoc, Uther's own son, is telling his father that he is doing this wrong thing in his pursuit of Ygraine while new Saxon troops are landing on the souther shores and marching north Roderick, despite his loyalty to Uther, is only willing to bring his knights to Cornwall and leaves his foot soldiers behind because he fears incoming Saxon troops While Uther is off risking the lives of his men (and his son, who dies in battle) to satisfy his cock, the city of Pensevey is sacked. "While Uther was engaged in Cornwall, King Ælle of the South Saxons was reinforced by another contingent of Germans brought over from the continent by his son Cissa. Together they lay siege to the city of Pevensey, and after starving the residents for weeks they assault the walls and slay everyone. Men, women, and children are sacrificed to Wotan, the bloody Saxon war god." Uther is responsible for those subjects of his dying. I know the line is often "Uther may not be a good man, but at least he protects Britain from the Saxons." But the fact is, by the 490s Uther is not doing that. He is a bad man, ruled by his own selfish desires, distracted from his duties as king, and letting his people die so he can use his military might to rape a woman. Full stop. This is not an oddity within the GPC. If the PKs travel with Prince Made to Frankland they will witness Madoc betray his commitment to a Roman lord and abandon the man and his troops to his enemies. The text explicitly asks the GM to ask the players how they feel about this. It is called out as a rotten act, and the GPC wants the players (not the knights, but the players) to reflect on this. Time and time again this happens, with certain key figures being rapists, dishonorable, selfish, indifferent to their commitments, and so on. And then the text asks the players to reflect on whatever they just witnessed or heard about. The GPC rubs the noses of the PKs and the players in the behavior of nobles that betray the ideals the game presents and asks, "Now, what do you think of that? What are you going to do? How do you want to behave?" Again, this is all explicit. I'm not reading anything into the text. It is all right there. And I love it. I love that the Uther Phase sets things up like this. I think its great. But I'm well-versed in Le Morte D'Arthur. I'm very familiar with King Arthur Pendragon and what it is doing as a game, and what the GPC is doing as a campaign. But for some players the dissonance between how they want to behave and how their leaders behavior might cause whiplash. So there is a challenge right there -- for both the players and the GM. KAP + GPC sets up a lot of thematically challenging material that runs counter to a lot of RPG expectations. And so I was curious if other people have dealt with this and if so how it played out. And even if the players do engage with the challenge of the GPC ("Given what your nobles do, what sort of knight will you be?") there might be certain lines that some player fucking do not want to cross. Uther is a rapist. More than one player might reasonably say, "I want to play this game, but I do not want to serve that lord." And I say "Fine!" Because the game wants you making those choices. For some players they might think they are bucking the game by thinking this way. I have had a talk with everyone and made it clear, "No, no... you're doing it right! This is what the game wants you to engage with!" But still... it can be tricky! So I was looking for clues about how KAP and GPC are actually set up. I understand the text can be sanded down to turn Uther into something he is not in the Le Morte or GPC. But that isn't what I'm looking for here.

Here's a story an acquaintance of mine related to me yesterday: Using that story as a springboard: Did your players ever have a problem with the core, cultural conceits of the game? We had a good, solid talk last night, prompted by one of the players doing a heartfelt monologue about now having reading the first chunk of Le Morte, discovering “Uther is shit, what he does is horrible, horrible,” and wondering if they can murder him. This led to be declaring: Yes, you could murder Uther But it will be hard to do, and you might not pull it off (Uther is a solid warrior, and he has many loyal men who will protect him in a fight) There will be social fallout that will what the game is about for a while During the discussion it became clear that this player (along, perhaps, with others) missed what other RPGs have offered her in the past — what I’m now calling the “Punch the Nazi” pleasures, where the setting isn’t ideal, but you are free to go right the wrongs by being free-agents of such a type that politics, society, and culture are meaningless to you. The fantasy is real by the way! It has its appeal! Give me show about a man or woman doing what is right despite social norms and I an IN!!!! But as the players point out Pendragon has lots of elements right there on the character sheet that hem in the PKs against certain behaviors and encourage others.Now, the game allows you to create the character you want over time. If you behave certain ways, if you take certain actions, if you spend your Winter Phase points certain ways, you can slowly (but not easily) create something new in Mythic Britain (which is what I think the game is about in many ways). It is an effort. Which runs counter to Punch the Nazi play.Everyone is having a good time. They tell me this, and I see it. But I’m curious about this larger issue, if it was a problem for play. How it played out.As I said last night, “We have…” and I counted on my fingers and finally said, “eight thousand other RPGs we could be playing. There’s no need to be playing a game that makes us uncomfortable or not what we want.” The answer "They should accept the setting" is both obvious and dull. These are terrific players and there are in the game. But they haven't been in a game like this before. So I'm curious how others have experienced this reaction from players (if at all), how people have maybe utilized to make player better, and so on.

Hi Stan, A number of random thoughts: I still think King Arthur Pendragon 3rd edition is the most elegant and attractive edition of the game -- and of any RPG. (I know many people don't like the cover, but once we get inside the layout and the art is best of the bunch in my opinion). As Morien points out, the game really hasn't changed much between editions when it comes to rules. (The biggest change is always how the battle system works!) As Morien also points out, and as I've been saying for years, the 4th edition is 3rd edition + Knight Adventurous + a Magic System. I'm not particularly fond of the 4th edition for two reasons I think a "Magic System" for KAP is nonsensical (though if you use 4th it can always be ignored) The book is kind of ugly. There was no new layout done, but the pages from 3rd and KA are simply shoved together so the two very differently layout of the two books create a kind of mess in design The 5th edition doesn't really have more rules or "crunch" than the 3rd edition. (Again, the core rules don't change very much.) The biggest change is in background information -- Uther's reign is default for 5th, Arthur's reign is default for 3rd. All the extra crunch for 5th comes in the supplements for 5th edition which adds lots and lots and lots of extra detail. Meanwhile, the key, core supplement for 3rd is Knights Adventurous, which offers more background information about Britain and opens up possible background for knights. (In my current campaign (the GPC), I have three pagan knights and one Jewish knight, and I used KA to offer the players background information for the game. I like KA.) That all said, if you want to get going with KAP with a minimal of fuss, I absolutely recommend using 3rd edition for the kind of mini-campaign you are planning. There is no downside, and it keeps everything to a minimum of fuss. You start in Arthur's reign. You get the kind of knightly setting and adventures people imagine when they hear "King Arthur." And you work from basic homelands and faiths so you simply get going. (While KA is great, will you really need the material? No. Especially for what you are describing.) Your instincts seem spot on to me, and I say you are on track to getting the kind of game you want.

Oh, without doubt.

Hello all and thank you for the thoughtful, lengthy replies. Even as I typed that first post, I was ambivalent about all this. The other night, when the knight in question was rushed behind the lines for healing, and the two First Aid rolls failed to save him by one point, it was the time we normally end the game, I was exhausted, and it was difficult for me to bring my A-game for my thinking. This is the first PK death, I'm fond of the character, and no one wanted to see him go. But the fact is, no one saved Aurelius Ambrosius, no will will save Uther when he takes his mortal wound, and Arthur is doomed to die as well. Why should one vassal knight, beloved as he may be to us, be spared death's final door? I also came across this from the 5th edition after I posted that first post: Ultimately, as everyone above has pointed out, if if I leave death's door open this time, what happens the next time it is about to slam shut on a fallen PK. The game is the game, it is deadly, and no matter how hard Maiden Adwen tried to save the knight, the fact is, she came up short. He's still alive, but unconscious, his breath shallow, motionless in his shattered state. "He will die by midnight," she says. And that's that. With the quote above, along with all of your recommendations, I know I'm doing the right thing by sending out an email to tell the player to get one if his family members made and ready for knighthood. Again, thank you all!

I'm finally running the Great Pendragon Campaign! I'm having a great time, the players are having a great time. (None of them have played King Arthur Pendragon before, but are loving it.) Last night, 490 AD, we ran the Battle of Lindsey. Tension all around. One knight got cocky and didn't divide his attacks to make sure he crit one of his opponents. He took a bad wound, and then another one on the next round. He was knocked down to -5 hp. His companions hauled him to the back of the battle where the lover of one of his companions with a high First Aid made two rolls (one for each wound). One roll netted 2 points of healing, the second 3 points. So he was now at zero hp. The rules say that a character at negative of 0 hit points will die if he is not restored to positive hit points by midnight of that day. The knight's companions are desperate to save him. He is mortally wounded, on death's door... and yet he is still alive. He only needs one more hit point! The question is: Thoughts on what they might do in the remaining hours of this day? Mundane methods of healing allowed by the rules have been tapped out, as far as I can tell. (Yes?) So, magic! Somehow the companions need to breath a bit of life into their companion. How might they do this? (TO BE CLEAR: I know I can come up with something. I'm simply brainstorming with y'all.) Are there any interesting adventures along these lines folks are familiar with? Finally, of the four knights who have played so far, three are Pagan, one is Jewish. A fifth knight is joining the game next week, and she will be Christian. So all sorts of religious options are available, as well as straight up magic. I'm assuming witches and other mundane and magical creatures can come into play. Thoughts?

Thanks for the reply @Uqbarian I was asking about social recognition. As far as I can tell, the act of marriage is supposed to determine the children born between the man and the woman as being the man's children, thus line of succession is legit. (Yes, the logic has gaping holes in it... but here we are.) King Arthur Pendragon assumes a healthy Pagan culture living alongside the dominant Christian culture (which I'm all for!) But the Pagan culture also celebrates lust, fertility rituals, polyamorous relationships and so on. So things like marriage/first born son/legitimate line of succession and so on get somewhat tricky. And look, I know I can come up with something. I'm simply polling how others handle it. Thanks.