Atgxtg

There is something similar with checks. The core rules, especially the latter editions note that checks are only awarded when the GM states so, yet most published adventures are fairly liberal in awarding such checks, with practically every use being worth a check. My impression is that most uses in play are worth a check, especially considering the `1 adventure per year pace, but that the later rules were written to give GMs who prefer to limit skills checks the ability to do so. I suspect the same hold true with the trait rules. While the rules have been loosened up for people who want more control over how they roleplay their character, the original intention seems to have been more geared towards trait rolls. I would have loved to have seen Greg run KAP to see just how he ran it.

What did you have for a religious bonus if anything? It looks like the article your linked to treats it as something other than a religious bonus, which is kinda nice as it opens the door up for Pagan Grail characters too, as you seem to have done.l That's the danger with religion in game. It can divide the group along religious lines. I've got a little of that happening now.

Most of my players and games haven't really been about religion. My players want to play heroic knights and adventure. My current campaign has featured religion more prominently than most, and that's only because I started so early that the Pelagian Heresy is a significant thing, and the Druids are "gone". But, by the time I reach the Uther Period, I will expect the Christian Schism to fade and the Druids to be reestablished, and religion will probably go back to being window dressing.

Really? That's not what I've seen. In most games, the players don't buy the rulebooks. D&D is the exception. I think it is beause with D&D you need the PHB to plan out your character. That depends on the price of the books as well just which books they "have to buy". A lot of the books aren't needed. Part of the problem here is that some games deliberately put spread out character types, options, weapon, etc. over mutiple books to get people to buy them. It's essentially adapting the CCG model to RPGs. Part of that is because in RQ/BRP characters "level up" at the end of each session or adventure, while in D&D they must accumulate XP over several sessions. So rather than 5 minutes each week, it's 20 minutes per month. But, since most of the leveling up is automatic in D&D, and as most players think ahead as to what new spell or ability to learn when they level up, the process goes faster.

Definitely YES! Whenever I work up a new rule for something I try to break it and get some others to try as well. It' much better to find this stuff out early and fix it than have to do damage control six months or a year down the road. A "rigorous" playtest can also help to reveal the severity of any problems, or any ambiguities in the rules.

It seems to give a lot of information on the original of and possible means of the Grail, but I didn't find it as an actual religion. looking at the article on Greg's website, it isn't written up as a separate religion there. It more a like a specialized form of Christianity as it doesn't give a "religious bonus" but instead is something that Christians can aspire to. So it looks like a character could be a Grail Christian and still be a British Christian. Mixing it with Roman Christianity also seems possible but probably a little more complicated, as the Grail and the Joseph of Aramithea story isn't part of church dogma. At least not at first. It might become more accepted later in the campaign, much like how the Grail eventually became accepted as a fact to people in the middle ages.

Yup, althouth it's not the % dice that do it, it's the combination of being able to resolve tasks without a table, and having one game mechanic to resolve most tasks. It's becuase from RQ onwward, most desginers had a idea of what the game was to encompass and built a game system to handle it. D&D, as the prioneer, dealt with things as they popped up. Yes, this is one of the reason why I think going back to RQ2 was a mistake. Instead of rolling back the clock 40 years and dealing with all the baggage that existed, it would have been better, IMO to go with the latest Chasoium version of the game (RQ3 or BRP BGB, or maybe the RQ4 notes) and update it. And it's not all that retro compatible, since so many of the game mechanics have been altered. As for the giant being fragile, that kinda makes sense. It doesn't take a lot of "damage" to kill someone or something. A 5 ton elephant can be killed with a single bullet. It's just difficult to do so instantly. And the elephant can do a lot of damage while you wait for it to bleed out. Now I think RQ3 did a better job of that, as SIZ factored more prominent in Hit Point calculations (as they should).

Part of this depends on which version of either game being referred to, as well. I think AD&D was probably the most complicated on the lot. If you went "all in" you needed separate "to hit "and "saving throw" tables for each of the four main classes, two sets of damage stats for each weapon, weapon vs. armor class adjustments, weapon and non weapon proficiency and specializations, class writeups for each of the various classes and subclasses being used, track the modifiers and methods for using each availability or skill (some were % dice, some were a D6 or a D10), track the special abilities of each class and race ("only surprised on a what?", "detect secret doors with a what?"), number of attacks against creatures with less than 1HD, just how much of a magical plus is needed to hit a certian monster, strength bows, etc. etc. Everyone got added on piecemeal, and had it own set of mechanics for handling it. IMO, AD&D was far more complicated than any version of RQ or any other version of D&D.

Most of the D&Ders I've game with had their own copy of the PHB and some other rulebooks. Most of the people I play any other RPG with do not. Yes the books cost money, but extra books not only mean another copy of the rules available to look something up, without stopping play or taking the GM's copy, but it also means more people have read that book and so know more about the game. The thing is with seasoned players chargen can be done in 15-20 minutes. With novices it can take a lot longer. Leveling up tends to be very fast, as most players already know what they want to pick for feats and other abilities, since they got a plan for their future development. This is also where a second book helps because you can look up the new abilities for one character while still working on another. In play I found that a second copy of the RQ rules cut chargen time for a group of 4-6 players in half.

Pendragon give such a bonus against mail, and RQ3 used to have a rule reducing the AP value. You could easily apply a half value vs. maces or some such. Mail is quite effective against arrows, if it's made correctly and worn over a gambeson. Most modern simulations of longbow vs. mail have been flawed. They tend to use the wrong type of mail, leave out the padding, don't provide and "give" to the target, use the wrong bow (most "longbows" today are underpowered), wrong arrows (too thin and light) and wrong arrowheads. But the general thought among historians these days is that mail is quite effective against arrows, and that the dominance of the longbow is more of as myth. The British victory at Crecy and Argincourt were more due to battlefield conditions and bad tactics by the French that due to the ineffectiveness of mail. Pendragon does it, as do a handful of thoer RPGs. It all depends on how you do it.

Okay. The thinking goes along these lines. Most people become familiar with D&D before they discover RQ. THey learn how D&D works, buy their own copy of the rulebooks and can do stuff like chargen pretty quickly. Then they try RQ, and: Chargen takes longer, because nobody is familiar with it, and... There is only one copy of the rulebook at the table Everything is different and so they must learn all new things, and... They must unlearn all the old D&D trick that they learned that do not work in RQ. So because it is new to them and takes longer to do things, they must look stuff up more due to their unfamiliar and only one copy of the rules, and it takes longer, the rules start to seem more complicated. Any thing that RQ either adds detail to that D&D doesn't have (such as hit locations) or requires a roll where D&D doesn't (spell casting, hit location determination) are viewed as added complexity. But, it's mostly the lack of familiarity and single rulebook, compared to the familiarity and multiple copies of rulebooks with D&D.

The old forms got spammed with a bunch of porn, and Nocturnal sold Pendragon to Chaosium shortly later. I guess an effort is being made to cleanout the old forum and try to salvage the old message posts and somehow migrate them to here.

Yes, it's amazing how well Fran Striker was at recreating the Lone Ranger for the modern day. Sometimes the villains are somewhat predicable, but that was probably more to the need to get so many stories out each week. Yes, while like most actors in the role, Price is miscast, and radio Templar is more of a typival radio mystery good guy than the Saint, but Prince is still very entertaining in the part. I'm not familar with thart one. I'll have to dig up an episode or two.

You can do that, but in battle it really doesn't matter as all the fights are single roll contests.

Yeah, but a typical hour long adventure for a radio or television show can easily fill up an entire game session or even two. So the 15 minute episode might be a short 1 hour adventure. I still don't know why Supermans' friends don't drown. No it didn't, but there were a lot of PUlp style adventures that could be adapted, as could many of the science fiction stories of the time, as they tended to be more fantasy than science fiction. Horr and mystery stories also port over well. Of course if someone is running a more modern or futurstic setting then they have more options. Somneone running a campaign set in the 1920-1950s era has it made. Supense is very good. Chandu is good, but 15 minutes with two commercial breaks bookended with other commercials kills the pacing. I vague recall one episode where he was going somewhere and by the time he got to his cloak (commercial), hat (commercial)and cane (commercial), he barely made it out the front door before the end credits. I find the Shadow a mixed bag, especially compared to the pulp version.Some of my favorites are Inner Sanctum, CBS Radio Mystery Theatre (it's from the 70s but was made by Hiram Brown, and showcased a lot of OTR actors), X-Minus One, the Green Hornet, and the Saint. More than one rushed RPG session had me adapting a favorite 60 year old radio program that I knew by heart on the fly. OTR shows are great that way because you get a nice adventure framework that your players won't be familiar with. There were a lot of stinkers, even with the good series, and the face pace, need to come up with scripts fast, and the reworking of older scrips led to a lot of stories being reused over and over and over (never trust any of Lamont Cranstons old friends, and in Detroit the corrupt politician is behind it), but that's forgivable when you realize that these writers had to write multiple episodes each week, and usually for several shows at the same time.

Yeah there are about a half dozen people, sort of disciples of DM Scotty, who post videos of this kinda stuff. Most of it is made with inexpensive supplies and some of the results are stunning.

That can work. I'd probably toss in a minor penalty (-2?) to further social rolls for the rest evening, as it's harder to be impressive once you've embarrassed yourself.

I don't see what you mean. In the BoB in real battles we kinda found out that rolling damage against the NPC doesn't have much meaning.. It is the PKs win/loss record that determines the unit results, all the damage does is determine a glory multiplier, and possibly reveal is someone is vulnerable to capture for ransom. Use knockdown. I apply rebated weapon and withheld blow modifiers after knockdown. The idea is that the knight will still hit his opponent hard, but will do so on areas that are protected rather than poking at the exposed parts. Typically if a knight gets knocked down two or three times he acknowledges defeat. It becomes rather obvious. Force Knights to act like the damage was real. Historically when someone took a good hit, in a mock fight, they were supposed to act like it. So look at the damage as if it were real and if significant, the knight should fall down, surrender and whatnot. If knights fails to do so, he could get spotted by the Marshall, who might start calling out his wounds from then on, to the Knight embarrassment (and possibly a reduction on the glory he earned for his victories, or even a loss of Honor).This could also be a good place for Honest or Deceitful rolls. You could add in a winner of the grand melee award. Roll a random value for a NPC. maybe something like 1d6x10 per round (with a modifier for the size of the tournament and quality of the opponents. Maybe just a best of multiple rolls), and if a PK beats he wins the grand melee and gets an extra 100 glory. That makes the melee personal and important to the PKs. Sometimes there are prizes for winning the joust and/or grand melee so that alos makes the outcome more interesting to the PKs. Put in rivals and enemies. PKs get more interested as to who wins a mock battle if it is against an enemy.

That's a good idea. I was noting that in the published adventures there are a lot of time where a character's virtues are tested, and rolls are required. It makes sense too. While we would all like to be paragons of virtue the reality is that in real life people don't always live up to the ideal. But in most RPGs it is a lot easier to do so, because the player ususally has complete control over his character and doesn't have to deal with the temptations and threats that the character would have to. The gorgeous temptress that might sway a man's actions , the pot of gold and the like are all illusionary rewards, and thus easy for a player to resist. That would be one Ozsome poppy field.

Yes often there is a choice but often it is a false choice, as in roll the trait or out of story. Often Greg would simply write stuff where everybody has to roll and they do not get a choice. I think the wording was made more ambitious in latter editions so people who don't like traits and passions governing their behavior and limiting their control over their characters had an out.

I can't speak for great minds. I just figured that it: Helped to fix the problem of excessive mortality Was simple to implement Made sense as a high CON increases the survivability against damage, disease, poison and most everything else in the game. Actually make CON a useful attribute for a wife.

Amen. One of the best sources for ideas and adventures suitable for a RPG. Unlike virtually every other form on entertainment, OTR shows had to be written at prepared at a rate similar to that of a gaming group, namely once a week (sometimes more!).

There are Welsh and Breton sources about Arthur that predate Chrétien de Troyes. Not that there is anything wrong with basing your campaign around Chrétien de Troyes as your primary source. I suspect Pendragon uses Marry partly becuase it is better well know and read in English speaking countries, and because there is something almost sacrilegious about using a non-British source for the primary source about such an British Icon.

I think what you want is the stuff that was in the earlier edtions. Specfically the tournament rules from KAP1, Nobles Book, or KAP 4s's Lordly Domains. Both devote about pages to tournaments. The Nobles book gives a nice breakdown and summarly sheet (it actually has an outline) of events and Lordly Domains gives a bit more detailed treatment and a table for determining opponents in a joust. Both are available in PDF form at DrivethruRPG at a fairly low price too. The basic procedure is as follows: Prep Work: The host builds the lists, send out messengers and preperares for what is to come. Arrivals: The guests show up and present themselves to the host, and are wealcomed as guests. The Lists: Knights approach the Heralrd to sign up for the list and given their time for their first match, join a team for the melee,, issue\e any challenges, and there is the "helm show" where everyone is revealed and those who are deemed unworthy are prevented from participating. The Joust: Knights are paired off against each other. Perk the Nobles Book, a single list (the norm). A single list can handle about 64 combatants per day. So if there is more than that the joust will either take more than one day, or additional lists would be needed to handle multiple contests at once. The Challenges: This is where Knights compete in various ways. Stuff like knights calling out rivals, or knights from other kingdoms to various of friendly and not so friendly contests. Stuff like a Knight of Levcomagus challenging any knight of Salisbury to a a Sword fight until knockdown or some such. The Grand Melee: Basically a mock battle. Usually forget with withheld blows and possibly rebated weapons. Other Events: Things like the bohort and archery contest for commoners are handled and generally not as singficant to knights. The Feast: This is where they celebrate the winner of the joust and the grand melee. The actual events in a joust and how deadly they are, and the stakes all vary by the type. Some are more decorative and are more like a pageant than a contest, while others are virtually warfare under another name.

Do you need full fledged adventures with stats, fleshed out ideas without stats, or just story hooks? THere are a lot of genric ideas and non-BRP adventueres out there that could be adapted but less BRP specific stuff.