Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Atgxtg last won the day on December 5 2019

Atgxtg had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,271 Excellent

About Atgxtg

  • Rank
    Senior Member


  • RPG Biography
  • Current games
  • Blurb

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Interesting, but not really BRP anymore, is it? I think the core BRP/RQ/Stormbringer game mechanics worked well for for for Stormbringer, except that the armor scores will a bit on the low side. The game could do with a bit of tweaking with the magic system and cultural notes to better fit the Young Kingdoms and EC overall Eternal Champion mythos. Maybe port over some sort of Hero Point mechanic to give the main characters a touch of "script immunity". Theleb K'aarna probably wouldn't be able to make all his escapes in game play without something like that.
  2. Elan hasn't been there for quite awhile, having been replaced with a Allegiance score that is much closer to Pendragon Traits. I could see further modifying this to make Law/Chaos as a trait pair with those desiring Balance require a score somewhere in the middle (9-11?)
  3. YOu appear to. And yes, "hounding him" is about right. Yes you do. With such terms as "dog-whistle", "racist trope" and "Sexist trope".
  4. The whole point of his example was that the villain comes back somehow in another body. So any sort of change from the villains previous body is going to bring out charges of his being racist, and/or sexists for making the new villain a member of whatever "group" he picks, and the same claims, plus those of not being inclusive if the villain's new body were the same race and gender as the first. He can't win no matter what he does. No, I don't know that. It's not deflection, it was the first example posted. You're the one who tried to change the topic in his post from "what if the main villain was the same guy". I'm surprised you didn't call him sexist for using "same guy". Yes, and Karloff wore a Fez in several of his roles. You overlook that many of those old films also happened to be classics. Karloff was an actor noted for playing villains. He got his roles and recognition thru merit, not through his ethnicity. But we're not allowed to run any game in the 20s or 30s because they were racist times. Or any time before that. Or after that. Claims can be made for any movie being insensitive to one particular group of people or another.
  5. What's wrong with that? Part of the point of villains is that they are bad and or evil people who do bad and/or evil things. If the Major Villain and their minions are all enlightened fair people, then how are they villains? Pretty much every story would have gone very differently if the bad guys weren't actually bad, but fair and could be reasoned with.
  6. I sometimes run an arch-nemesis. It depends on the game/type of campaign, and how the adventures actually play out. Often, a reoccurring villain happens by accident rather than design. Someone gets away or proves to be more successful than I expected them to be and they crop of later on. As for why he isn't the same guy each time? We'll mostly because I think that would suck. One of the major reasons why people play RPGs is that they can accomplish things and actually make a difference. If the villain keeps coming back, regardless of what the player characters actually do, then they loose some of that sense of making a difference, as Mr. Big Bad is going to come back. It reduces their sense of free will and agency too. Another reason why I think having the Big Bad always be the same guy is that the game will become somewhat monotonous. Each Major Villain worth their salt has their own modus operandi , personality, code of behavior and so on. If the Big Bad is always the same, then all the adventures involving him with tend to fall into a pattern. Series 8 of Doctor Who fell into that trap, with the Master being behind every plot. That's why in fiction arch nemesis either show up infrequency, or sit back as an "end boss" with under bosses who act as the antagonists along the way. A lot of old school anime shows, especially giant robot anime shows followed that pattern, with a Big Bad boss who the heroes personally confront at the end, with several lieutenants who themselves function as short terrn arch villains (until killed, demoted, or switch sides).
  7. Thank you! I'm sure owners of the Beyond the Wall PDF will find that very helpful.
  8. That depends on how big you make the scan. The overall picture quality is based on the size of the image as well as the dpi. So you can get a good map at 72dpi, but it has to be portortally larger to get the same detail as one at 300 dpi or higher. I wouldn't, but I'd consider sending it to them to ammend the existing pdf, unless, of coruse they beat me to it, which it seems they will.
  9. Do you know what the resolution is? I have the hardcopy, not the PDF. Maybe it would be possible to get a higher rez-scan. The one I posted above is only at 72 dpi , which is okay for a computer screen. We really want at least 300 dpi or so for a printable version to keep the details. I could look for my copy in storage and maybe scan it in sections and merge them into a bigger higher rez map.
  10. My hard copy is in storage at the moment, but there should be a big map in the book that looks something like this: (Note that this is at reduced resolution for informational purposes, to show what should be there, without violating any copyright laws by clearly showing what is there)
  11. Perhaps? Inflection and intent are not always easy to pick up on in text. You're welcome.
  12. That's sort of the case with most GURPS setting books. The same holds true for the Rolemaster setting books, or even KAP1. I don't think that's a bad thing either. Frankly, any GM who wants to go off down a rabbit hole for a non-standard version of a story should go and do more research. THe nice thing about Pendragon and the GPC is that a GM doesn't need to do any research to run it. They still should read Malory, or at least Pyle or some other streamlined rendition of the "standard" version of the tale, but they don't have to. Someone who wants to run a Roman Arthur or a strictly Cyric one is going to have to do their homework. BTW, I don't think the current trend of huge gamebooks is any better. Bigger books make it harder to find something when you need to. One thing I like about Pendragon is that the supplementary rules are somewhat modular in nature. No one actually needs to use any of the supplements to play the game. Yes, they can expand upon and enhance the game, but none of them are vital to the game, not even the GPC. Does she? Yes she does in the recent KAP supplments, but that doesn't really mesh with what came before. Much like how several character's religion has changed between editions. No, it not migratory Era Britain, but it not really Medieval Britain either. Its a mythical age that doesn't quite mesh with reality, and that's sort of the point. If people wanted Medeival Brtitian they could find a game that covered that. Pendragon is Arthurian Britain, which is half real and half legend.
  13. Not really. The "needs of history" are basically the need of story. Cultures that adapted and altered the Arthruian legends to make them more accessible to their audience or to promote a s[efic agenda (both Lancelot and Galahad were added for specfic reasons) are doing the All storytelling alters things in someway to fit the goals of the story, even if is is just to provide a structure. Reality isn't tighly plotted with easy to follow stroeis that resolve themselves up neatly. Criminals? I think you are being unfair. Neither Dumas nor Shakespeare claimed to be historians, or to be telling a ture histroy. They were storytellers. As for Homer, he probably didn't exist but instead was a pen name the stories were attributed to at a later date. They are not like, say Geoffrey of Monmouth who passed his writing off as some sort of history, or how a lot of so called historians were mostly writing propaganda. Yup. Exactly. Arthur's Camelot is the golden age that never was. I don't think that people are necessarily a more historical version of Arthur, but instead one that is closer to the version they prefer. The thing about the King Arthur legend is that there are lots of variations on it, and different bits and not one cohenet narritaive. That's why even things like how Arthur get's Excalibur has multiple versions (is it the sword in the stone or given to him by the Lady of the Lake?), and how things have been changed in the game over the years. I think that is a natural desire too, as the legend King Arthur continues to evolve over time in order to remain relevant. That's why T.H. White's Arthur is more social worker and less monarch than Malory's Arthur. Richer, as there are no doubt people who are interested in Arthurian Lore who have no interest in playing Pendragon. I agree. But I also think that Pendragon is solid enough to cover some of the variants in supplements. I disagree somewhat with you here. If they game knew what it wanted to be then it would have been that in KAP1 and never changed. Pendragon has changed with editions. KAP1 was more vague and open ended, but over the years, it has become more defined and tied closer to Malory. One example of that is Camelot. In KAP 1 it was Cadbury Castle, a site that was recently suggest (by Ashe) as a possibility for a historical Arthur. In KAP3, Greg switched it to Winchester, and stated to phase out the use of Celtic and Roman place names for those used in Malory. Another is how the sword in the stone was merged with Excalibur in the GPC.
  14. Somewhat. I think some of the changes with Arthurian lore were more natural and occurred as the story was unintentionally altered and updated when retold over the ages to people in different times and places. Hollywood's changes tend to be more deliberate or out of ignorance about the story they are supposedly retelling, or even to simplify a complex story to make it more easily understood.. But I'm sure a lot of the changes to Arthurian lore over the years were deliberate too, so probably not too much different than today.
  15. Yup. IF someone has the money and is in the right location. Nope,. and it's easy to see why. Just imagine millions of aircars flying around a big city during rush hour, and what the typical fender bender will be like at 1500 feet. In fact if you look at the Jetsons closely, you might start to wonder just why everything is on platforms up in the sky? IS ther something wrong with the surface of the planet that prevents people from ever going there?
  • Create New...