TrippyHippy

Could be that. I cannot recall the name, just that it was mentioned that there would be some upcoming book that was based on playing magician characters. Considering that the core game doesn’t allow magician games currently, I’d regard it as a spinoff game.

Well, Greg Stafford went to great pains to re-establish the focus of the game towards playing Knights and Ladies when he did the 5th edition. In interviews at the time, he felt that 4th Edition had lost its focus as a game because it tried to expand into other options. I think that the core of the game should remain focussed on playing Knights and Ladies, and will most likely do so as they expand the GPC as the main supplemental support. After that point, they could expand into other options. There has already been suggested that there could be a spinoff game for playing Arthurian magicians for example.

Thing is, if you know what you are doing, Elric can easily be incorporated into Luther Arkwright’s multiverse. And, yes, I’d like to see a new Stormbringer too, by whoever but, for whatever reason, it isn’t happening. As Conrad points out, the last game version of Elric of Melniboné was released as a Mongoose RuneQuest II supplement, entirely compatible with Mythras.

In order to celebrate the 40th Anniversary, could Chaosium give away the entire catalogue of Call of Cthulhu titles for free?

If I can wait for Greece, I can wait for Luther Arkwright.

He talks about a new edition of Luther Arkwright!!!!! 😀

Oh...er...ok...just a reprint then.

For the 40th Anniversary, could Chaosium please bring about an alignment in the stars that could see Cthulhu finally rise and consume everything? T’would be spectacular. 😎

So, you will probably have a slipcase for this, and another four-era-book slipcase for the new Great Pendragon Campaign?

I don’t think this is a particularly stupid question about the slipcase. A stupid question would be: is it slippy?

Actually, I don’t think the Joker movie has a very realistic portrayal of mental illness at all and this is one of the major criticisms of the movie. It is more a scriptwriting affair of adapting ideas from Martin Scorsese’s King of Comedy and Taxi Driver to the comic book milieu than it is of a researched representation of any documented case - although I do think Joaquin Pheonix still acted very well in it though. I do think there is a difference between realistic portrayals of mental illness in movies (which are often quite dry rather than compellingly entertaining), and cinematic portrayals of ‘madness’. In horror movies, there are lots of great movies with 'mad' characters in them - The Haunting, Repulsion, The Shining, Mulholland Drive, Donnie Darko, The Babadook, Candyman, even Evil Dead II.

I mean....would that be a problem for you?

Mythos Magic is the underlying ‘science' of the universe that is beyond human comprehension. It is difficult to rationalize how it works, because it is expressly beyond our own comprehension - and doesn’t follow our own rationalized logic.

I think, taking on board that almost every game published still manages to accrue some fans regardless, any statement of ‘failure’ has to be qualified. Some people liked it. Anyway, the quick summary for why it ‘failed’ is: 1) It wasn’t the original ‘Magic World’ from Steve Perrin. The rules and setting details were different. 2) It felt semi-generic, which amounts to being bland for some people. 3) It was published largely because Chaosium felt they needed an entree into the fantasy rpg market - which is generally cited as the biggest selling genre. They did this at the time because Chaosium no longer had a fantasy IP - having lost the Stormbringer/Elric one - so they essentially released the same game minus Moorcockian references, relabelled it with the 'Magic World’ moniker, and included a formative fantasy setting in the back. When Chaosium had its management takeover, and brought back RuneQuest as an IP, Chaosium ceased to have a marketing purpose for Magic World. It wasn’t worth putting in the time and resources to develop Magic World, and build a fanbase, when RuneQuest/Glorantha already had an established fanbase and was a better investment.

Could you reprint Unseen Masters, by Bruce Ballon, please? And actually, why not make a commemorative reprint of the 1st Edition Call of Cthulhu.....seeing as it is the 40th Anniversary and all...

There was also The Yellow King by Robin D Laws using the Gumshoe rules (as used in Trail of Cthulhu). It came in a box set with four different eras and, to be totally honest, I couldn’t really make much sense out of it. Other people may like it though. Oh and Tatters of the King was excellent, one of my favourite CoC campaigns, and Impossible Landscapes (for Delta Green) is lining up to be one of the campaign releases of the year (I’ve seen some of the preview material).

Mine still is ‘awaiting delivery’ from Australia to NZ. Anybody got their’s in Australia or NZ?

It is appreciated when other posters express their situations. I’me experiencing the same thing here in NZ, where we would expect deliveries from Australia. My experience from Chaosium deliveries this year, and other companies too, is that everything is delayed with Covid. There could be other explanations for this delivery too but, honestly, as long as you are patient these things will get through.

Any more news on this?

It remains to be seen, although the beauty of doing it as a Kickstarter is that if it fails to register enough interest it doesn’t happen and Chaosium lose nothing from trying. However, although I think you are right that it doesn’t have a beloved edition status in the way RQ2 does, I think there are still a number of fans who like collecting classic editions to make it happen. I wouldn’t be surprised if Worlds of Wonder gets a kickstarter too in the near future.

So, to get this clear in my head, the things we can expect to buy or back over the next year for Pendragon include: - A Kickstarter for the Classic 1st Edition Box set - Hmmm....not sure, yet. Definitely liked the Classic release of Runequest 2E. However, that is my preferred version of Runequest. A Pendragon box set with large maps though.....hmmm - A Starter Box King Arthur Pendragon - Some people love box set starter sets, and the starter set for CoC was well done, but I don’t really think they are aimed at me. - A new 6E KAP Corebook with whatever changes are happening in it. If they do it in a leather cover and make it a slipcase set, regardless of the cost, I’m likely to be a buy in. I’m not so sure about changes to the rules - and hope they’re kept to a minimum anyway. I’m slightly confused as to what else will be included to round out a slipcase? A bestiary? Maps? - A new four-volume era specific set for The Great Pendragon Campaign for 6E - Also potentially in a slip case. This is, basically, the main draw for me. I’d buy them in leather too. - As of yet untitled book for Magician-based campaign - Not sure about this one yet. Will have to see how it comes out. - Other potential supplements - also not sure, if I have already made a huge investment in the GPC (which will have years of gaming material already) - Ancient Greek and Samurai games based on the Pendragon. Interesting, but will have to see what they are like first. - Le Morte d'Arthur and The Arthurian Concordance - Well, I’ve backed these already, but I hope they arrive some point in the next year also along with everything else. - The Green Knight movie. Yep will watch that. Will also re-watch Excalibur. - The T-Shirt. Let me know when it arrives. Anything else I missed or mis-understood?

* Experience checks I think it is part of my sessions, generally in roleplaying, that all players like to make checks in experience or personal improvements after every session as a routine. So, on that basis, any successful use of a skill during a session is checked. Obviously, this needs to be tallied to the storylines and sessions you run, but I think it is worth noting that Pendragon campaigns run on the idea that every session occupies a whole year of game time, while the general mortality of characters in many ways curtails the development of characters that develop too fast anyway. * Solo's. Although Pendragon is one of the best games for solo play, because of the Knightly premise, I’ve personally not done so much with them. Having said that, maybe I should do more. * Non-knightly character creation? All PCs are Knights, basically. While there is scope to have other types of characters, I prefer them to be the basis of entirely new games in the shared setting. So, Magicians as per the mooted Book of Magic, for me, is a supplemental game. * Squire character creation? I think there are rules for this and, actually it is pretty necessary because of the aforementioned mortality rate of Knights. You need back up characters in the wings.

Both of you seem to be under the assumption that I don't know this or that I have an attitude about this. As far as I am concerned, when I have actually played Pendragon with women I know, we have had no problem about them playing whatever they want. This is not the irony here. It is a tenet of feminism that both men and women are equal. To say that women should be treated as if they are equal is therefore a sexist statement, because it implies that they aren't equal. However, creating a game based upon the society depicted in old books, that reflect feudalism as much as anything else and is inherently sexist, classist and actually a bit racist, automatically leads to the conundrum of how you create authenticity to the source without being offensive. The irony is that by making the statement of playing women as if they are equal, which is essentially how you play female knights in the game, then it is ironically being sexist even though you are playing it that way to not be sexist. Personally, I think it is an issue that has already been addressed well by Greg Stafford in previous editions, including the option of playing female knights, so I can't see how people can claim that the game is suddenly being ‘woke’ with a new edition that encourages female participation. However, my real point, I guess, is that if the basic argument is that people just want to have fun with the game - and fair enough - then perhaps being so serious as to miss an intended joke, is possibly, not really the best way of supporting that idea. Edited for clarity.

No. According to me, there is an irony to be found in trying to interpret an inherently sexist piece of literature through the lens of modern values. I apologise for finding humour in an area you cannot. I haven't complained about any npc - you appear to have the wrong person here.

So, in order for us to not be sexist in our gaming, we must all treat women as if they are equal? Right?! 🤪 I’ll get my coat...but I’ll probably pick up Pendragon and related stuff in the coming future.