Atgxtg

No doubt. I'm not claiming that you can't, or that you shouldn't or that it would be difficult to do so. I was just stating that Pendragon is Arthurian Fantasy not the "High Fantasy"common to most FRPGs.

Yeah, but a Windlord RQ is definitely over the top for Pendragon. It clashes with the whole gritty Dark Age/Medieval vibe. Imagine how much the tone of a Pendragon game would change if you added RQ Sprirt Magic or D&D magic. Yes, mechanically you could port over Spirit Magic without much trouble. You'd probably want to add a POW stat, and change +5% to +1, but rules wise, it would be a snap. But having the knight running around with Bladesharp 4 and Heal 6 would radially change how the game feels and plays. And with D&D magic, just one D&D Cleric with all that healing would warp things. Again, it's easy to make modification to Pendragon, RQ (the first BRP game) turned out to be a very flexible and adaptable system. Just look at how different Pendragon is to other D100 games (okay, it isn't a D100 game, but it's a close relative) and yet it's easy to port stuff over from RQ/BRP and such. But my point was Pendragon isn't high fantasy. Yes, you could make it high fantasy, but that's not what the game and setting are, and we were describing it to somebody.

Neither am I, but I'm not sure if that's coming across in the posts. I think some people are getting what I'm trying to say an other not. Merely no. But it does play a factor. Most of the questions pooping up on these boards aren't from players new to RQ, but from old RQ players trying to reconcile RQG with what they already know. In many cases it stuff that's ingrained and the result somewhat automated. For example in just about every Chaosium RPG you round numbers to the nearest. In RQG you round in favor of the player. That's a small change, but one that will lead to lots of ol' timers messing up. No, and I don't suspect I will for some time. Not until I see what happens when people have played the new game for awhile, and how the various changes and additions work out, and how Chaosium responds to any problems that do crop up..It's the whole 80% of the RPGs we buy just sit on the shelf thing. It's a catch 22. If I buy the rules, I end up supporting the game financially even if I end up not liking them and wishing that it were wiped from the face of the Earth as soon as possible. BTW, Just to clarify, I'm not saying that I feel that way about RQG. I do feel that way about MRQ, and don't want to repeat the same mistake of buying the game simply because of it's title and the fact the Steve Perrin and Greg Stafford's names are on the cover. It's not about the $28 for the PDF, it's about the direction of the game. As one gamer and one customer, there is only so much I can do one way or the other about this or any other game. Buying it (or not) is about all I can do. Have I? Could you please post cases where I've done that? I've asked questions, and even expressed preferences, but haven't said the new rules are flawed or broken. I have said there are bugs in RQ2 that were addressed in RQ3 (for example the secondary characteristics in calculating category modifiers), but that's not the same thing. Perhaps, except that I'm not the only one creating posts with questions about the new rules. The pattern seems to be that it's the people who've been playing RQ for decades who are raising questions, mostly because of the ripple effect of changes. RQ is (or at least was) a game where the rules are integrated and changing one facet of the game affects several others. Maybe trying to roll back the clock 40 years has something to do with it.

LOL! We're all doing it. Like Yoda said, we have to "unlearn what we have learned". In my case I was Lucky. Stormbringer 1st edition was the first Chaosium/D100 RPG I picked up and so I have fond memories of high skill characters doing a quick exchange of attacks and parries. It was actually quite cinematic. They did? I don't even feel guilty about that one. Most the characters in our games used dodge as a defense of last resort. Parry was usually much higher, and not so much of a gamble.

Yeah. It was a rule in Stormbringer and Magic World where if you made a Critical/Special Parry you could make a free attack, possibly with a reduction to skill (depends on which version of the game). Now, since the rule of making multiple parries with a weapon originated in Stormbringer along with the riposte rule, I assumed that they ported that over too. My bad. BTW, This serves as a great example of how not knowing the rules is an advantage, and knowing the rules a disadvantage. My "knowing" the parry & riposte rules and using them for years worked against me, and is interfering with my ability to grasp the "new" rules, because they "aren't new". If this were a D&D or Pathfinder site I wonder how most players would react to a monster that had a -4 Armor Class?

Yup. That is a huge plus. The rest of us have to sift though the rules we know then remember which version of a rule applies here, and so on. Often it's the stuff that "we know cold" that's doing us in, because it doesn't apply in RQG. We are tossing out most of 40 years worth of the changes! I think that is also true of the designers, and might be partly responsible for the ambiguity. There are probably cases where they know how something works, but that wasn't how it worked in the text that they copied from RQ2. This here could be the classic example. RQ never had a riposte rule, but had limits on the number of attack and parries you can attempt. Stormbringer had a riposte rule, but no limit of the number of attacks and parries you could make. Hence the conflict.I suspect that since the riposte rule is new, it should override the previous limitation on parries and attacks. But that's just my way of thinking. If you want a real headache, consider the effect the riposte rule is going to have with splitting attacks. If my skill is at 100% and I split it in half, and then parry, is my riposte attack at 80% (100%-20%=80%) or 30%(100%/2=50%-20%= 30%)?

Wow! I though the Sword in the Stone was cute for kids but a lousy King Arthur film. I don't care much for White either. Arthur the Social Worker who is pushing for reform and self government. I can understand it. The historical Arthur isn't what modern people would consider to be a great ruler. He means well but he's moody, rash, and autocratic. Which is what Kings were like. He was just less so than most . I get it. You'd like a more 5th Century Iron Age, Less High Middle Ages Arthur. You could do that in Pendragon-especially in the earlier editions, but Mallory is sort of the default. It wouldn't a bad idea if the did a supplement with variant King Arthurs (Romanized Celt, Celtic Mythic Hero, etc.) for Pendragon similar to what GURPS did. The problem is, most people want and expect Knights, Chivalry and all that sort of stuff. So thats how most games and films handle it. Keep in mid though that just because you don't like the Chivalric version doesn't mean that Excalibur is necessarily bad for going that route. King Arthur is a legendary character. he may have been based on a real person( he probably was based on several real people) but there is nothing wrong out out of place about the medieval trappings. It's not like he's Julius Caeser or something. Do you get upset that Superman doesn't use phone booths anymore? The updated the character to modern times. That's what Mallory did. It just that we today stopped modernized King Arthur because we today believe in self government and don't want a dictatorial ruler (even a benevolent one) telling us what to do. So he became a period character. Maybe that's what the problem is. You are expecting Arthur to be that. Frankly it doesn't seem like it would be good to me (Camelot 90210?), and that is was targeted towards your age group at the time. Wonder if you would like it if you saw it now. There were a lot of shows that I liked whenI was ten that I'm not so fond on now-even somewhat embarrassed about(Man From Atlantis- at least the pilot still holds up)

My concern is will Chaosium clarify and correct this stuff, or just dismiss it as nitpicking?

Yup. That's why I'm hoping to make much of the setting similar enough to what they will eventually end up with, and look very closely at their characters to see just what sort of things the players are interested in doing. . I wouldn't try it this way if I didn't know my players. But it is VERY risky. So much so that I might not even try it. I have pulled this sortof thing off a couple of times in the past (my Doctor Who campaign worked out fantastically with this approach), but it is a challenge. Possibly. I'm not certain that that part of it would be a problem. I've never seen anyone be bothered if the GM ups some of their stats. It will be the change in tone, power, focus and scope that will shake things up. But I do believe that if I try this. I'm going to have to be very careful about how I do it. If I do in in stages I could watch the players reactions, and always pull the plug on the idea and just keep things as a fantasy RPG.

Yeah, that's thing thing about Excalibur. It might not be the best movie every made, but it is probably the best King Arthur movie ever made. There's not much out there to challenge it. Maybe the Richard Harris musical Camelot, if you are into musicals, but practically every other King Arthur movie is total garbage. BTW< I kinda agree that Mallory is a washed down version of the older Celtic tale, but it's also the most popular, interpretation of the tale. Kinda like Frank Miller's take on Daredevil. I prefer the older version, but the Miller version caught on.

I don't, mostly because I can see keeping everything else under wraps while doing it. If I could be open about this, I could probably just run Amber Diceless RPG. So I'd have to come up with a good cover story for such a radical departing from the BRP norm. Plus with these players there would probably be less infighting over who has the best STR, Sword skill, etc. They'd just each pick thier own niche. And with only 4-5 players there would be more room for each character. Yeah. I did up a scale based on the point values in Amber and worked it out as Human (10.5), Chaos (21) and Amber (28)-so roughly 10, 20 30. Corwin I'd rate in the 40s, so he and Random could lift and move a car (SIZ 50ish). But I'm also going with the +8 to STR/SIZ per doubling. Yeah> My current plan is to add something between 8-20 points to the PC's STR, CON and POW stats (or maybe just double them) secretly. They don't notice it to start because the shadow they are living is is built to their scale, has higher gravity and so forth. They will discover the truth once they head out into other shadows. Say the guy whose STR in now 25 picks up a longbow and snaps the bowstring when he overpulls it. I was also thinking of possibly using BRP hero points to give the PC some extra resilience and to help them cope until they are up to speed. I could rationalize as a form of subconscious use of Pattern to alter random events. Not that Hero Points really need rationalization. Thanks. I can probably use it. I figure this could work out fantastically, or it backfire badly. I could lose the players before they find out what's really going on. That;'s why I think I have to flesh out other aspects of the campaign so that they will be interested in things before the Amber stuff comes up. That way it can be a subplot that increases in importance until it ends up as a game changer, literally.

THE RPG formally known as HeroQuest?

BTW, Thanks for the comments, they are helping me plan this out. I've gotten a few ideas from these posts.

I had pretty much the same idea. I was thinking that to walk the Pattern would take Willpower rolls (to push on) and Stamina rolls (it's exhausting).with some sort of penalties for failure (loose magic points for Will and a fatigue penalty, of, say -10%r stamina). The three veils from the books would be the waypoints. It's almost worth bringing in RQ3 fatigue points just for walking the pattern. I was planning on putting a reflection of the pattern in the starting location that the PCs might discover and walk. It was one of several hints as to what is going on that I want to seed in the campaign. That, some trumps, and maybe something anachronistic. Yeah, Spirit Combat seems about right. I don't think I'd just allow it with eye contact the way Amber does. It would probably need some sort of magical power to initiate it, but that shouldn't be all that difficult to get. Logrus would. Probably several skills. Trump Artistry would be a skill. Some sort of Enchantment in D100 terms. Probably will need to look at RQ3 or maybe Stormbringer for that. SB will be very helpful for the Courts of Chaos stuff If I use RQG type sprint combat, then Trump Use could double as the Spirit Combat skill, or maybe just rename the Spirit Combat skill, Psychic Combat. That would probably handle the whole Psyche aspect of things.

Maybe, maybe not. Plus I'm not sure if that the internal warfare is a good thing. I get why Wujick did in the the RPG, so he could capture the feel of the Corwin series, but I think in an RPG it could be a bit of a problem-at least initially. Unlike the Amber books, or an Amber diceless game, which can be heavily controlled by the GM, in a standard RPG such conflict just leads to dead PCs. Either they kill off each other, or lack of cooperation lets the baddies do it. The Corwin series started off without internal rivalry (that didn't start until Chapter 2 or 3 ), but with Corwin not really knowing what was going on, and starting the players off this way does that. Besides, nothing prevents the PCs from coming up with other reasons for internal warfare. I just have to introduce a few things for them to be rivals over and them play up whatever differences arise. That might even work out better than tensions created during the auction. Or, I could just give the PCs points and auction off stats and skills. How many points for the 18 STR or Weapon Skill @90%?

How about using the secondary weapon to augment the first?

I was thinking I might just up their stats and justify it as they were always that tough and strong, but they didn't notice it because the shadow they were from was built so that they would seem normal. So if everybody had a 20 STR and CON (about Chaos Rank Amber) then 20 is 'average' and nobody will think otherwise. Think along the lines of a character living on a planet with twice the normal gravity. A "100 pound" weight might actually weight 200 pounds, but all the scales read 100 pounds, and since the characters are twice as strong as they think, they don't notice the weight. And, since they have twice the CON the damage from dropping it gets offset by the increased hit points. This has the added perk that the heroes will get some significant stat bumps once they are off their home shadow. It will be a nice little surprise for the PCs, and player will be both surprised and pleased when their stats "go up". How often does a GM give player characters a big boost (8-20 points depending on just where I want to place them on the Amber scale) for free? That should keep them hooked for a bit. One of the nice things about BRP is that all the various options, powers, tech, etc. all help in an Amber campaign. That really helps with the various world building stuff.

That's what I was thinking and why I picked this approach. I figure I can even fudge stats a little later on by assuming that everyone on this shadow is really stronger and healthier than normal humans so as the PCs won't feel out of place. I was also thinking that I can do a bit of misdirection here by fleshing out the world a bit and letting the players get into the normal gear, magic. etc. of the setting, and then wow 'em when something Amberish warps their reality and changes the laws of physics (or magic) on that shadow. For instance, I was thinking that they would start on the coast with sailing ships, and have a personal ship that, unbeknowst to them, can fly. Then, just about the time they are getting caught up with having the only flying ship, they cross over into an adjacent shadow, where the flying ship came from.

I'm starting up a new campaign soon, and am going over the various things I could run. One thing that I'd love to run would be an Amber campaign (based on the Zelazny books). Unfortunately, my players like rolling dice and fighting stuff, and just wouldn't adapt to the whole dice-less thing. And most of them haven't read any of the books, despite getting books as gifts, being encouraged to read them,etc. But, the idea came to me that I could run a sort of "back door" Amber game using BRP. The idea would be that the characters are younger Amberites with no knowledge of their heritage, or the big picture, and are being raised in a world (personal shadow) designed for just that purpose. Said world working just like BRP, probably BRP Magic World (mixing in Moorcock isn't impossible, both versions of the Courts of Chaos are very similar). In Amber terms the players would be starting characters without any special powers yet, but with a lot of Good Stuff. The idea is that the characters were left here is safekeeping during the Patternfall War and the one responsible died before they could tell anyone else. The PCs start off on an estate, and have some teachers and guardians (I was thinking of using Ganelon), as the shadow was custom built for these PCs. Then something nasty comes around and the PCs start to discover clues to the heritage (for example, some Trumps and a "sometimes there" staircase) and get drawn into a full Amber campaign. I was thinking that, in Game Terms, Amber level is probably about 30 ish, and someone like Corwin has a STR in the 40s (he and Random could lift a car). Most of the Amber Magic could be duplicated by the BRP rules, and Power such as Pattern Imprint could be worked up in BRP terms (probably some skills and Stamina rolls, POW if resisted). Does this sound feasible? And would it be interesting? Any pitfalls?

Oh sure. I even said that it wouldn't be a hard fix. Just that it's something a GM needs to be aware of and do something about before running. I'd just revert to RQ3 shield values (Greg just cut them in half for Pendragon) and armor values (Greg just doubled them for Pendragon) for a start, Medium Shield 12 (so it can stop most of the damage from a sword hit by itself), Kit Shield 16, Legion Shield 18. I'd either use the RQ3 AP value for weapons, or just give them a default score based off of skill. 1/4 skill would work out nicely for weapon and shield parries. Like I said earlier, it would be interesting. I was considering adapting BRP Magic World to a LoTR game, but Pendragon LoTR could be interesting. Especially ifadapting stuff from The One Ring. Cultural Virtual and Rewards are a good fit for Pendragon.

Aragon and Legolas are probably a bit over the top. Yes, but from a game play view it means you have no protection if you aren't armored or carrying a shield, and not much (6 points) from the shield! That's fine for a game about knights, but you need to do something about that for other settings and characters. its what derailed someone's idea of using it for a Swashbuckling game a few years back. For something like LoTR you need to give the PCs something for a partial success-especially if the characters are unarmored. Think of how unarmored characters were in AD&D.

There are certainly similarities, but Middle Earth has a lot of high powered characters that would just outclass most Arthurian characters. You'd probably have to go all early Celtic to get to the same sort of power level. Game mechanics wise, there is another problem. Pendragon is geared towards armored characters (knight) and the rules are all biased towards that. Unarmored characters have a problem, and there is no parry to speak of. So most of the the characters in the Hobbit and LoTR would be toast. I think to run in Middle Earth with Pendragon you'd have to restore the armor and shield values back to their RQ ratings, and then add in weapon AP values so they can be used to parry on a partial success. But it's nothing that can't be dealt with.With a bit of work it could be a very good Middle Earth RPG. It might actually do better at handling some things better than some other Middle Earth RPGs. It's a fascinating idea.

You don't need 4th for magic in the setting.. You don't really need RPG style rules for magic in Pendragon becuase the PCs are knights, and will have to deal with things as a knight would. They can resist some things with thier traits, passions and stats, but there's not much they can really do about magic. DriveThru has 5.1 too But, it also has First Edition available for free. Download that and you can check out the basics of the game for free. More like the same theme but a different setting.

It's fantasy, but Arthurian fantasy, not the high fantasy of Lord of the Rings, D&D and such. The game is focused around knights, that's it. While there are rules toplay other type of characters, in a standard campaign >95% of the PCs will be knights. The tone is a bit gritter than the typical fantasy game. It's kinda like Magic World, but without (most of) the magic. Major wounds requirement treatment to heal properly (it's possible for such injuries to get worse and kill a character) and healing can take some time (hit points, armor, and weapon damages are all about twice what you see in other BRP games, but healing is about 3 points a week for most characters). Unlike other BRP games, combat, and other tasks are resolved by rolling 1D20 under skill. If you roll the skill exactly it's a crtical. If you roll a 20 it is a fumble, unless your skill is 20-then it's a critical. Skill scores over 20 add to the die roll. So someone who has a 24 Sword skill would add 4 to his rolls. When a task is opposed, both ides roll and the highest successful roll wins, with critical successes trumping normal successes. Combat is also handled with the opposed roll mechanic, with the winner inflicting damage on the loser. If the loser's roll was successful, he gets a partial success and can benefit from his shield's protection (6 points- about half that of an RQ shield) Pendragon has Traits and passions (it's where RQG got them), although the inspiration bonus is higher in Pendragon. Pendragon also has Glory. When a knight does great deeds he earns Glory (kinda like experience points in other games, only it's more about the fame than leveling up). For every 1000 Glory that a character earns other get a +1 to rolls to recognize him or his coat of arms. Also, for every 1000 Glory the character can raise any one rating on his sheet by 1 point, Characters, Traits, Passions, Skills, anything. Furthermore this increase can bypass the other rules or limits. A character can have a STR score of 30 in Pendragon, if he gets enough Glory to do it. Pendragon also has a timline and pace. In general you have one adventure a year, which is about one game session on average. Since the campaign is the life of King Arthur and starts before Arthur and ends after his reing, characters will age. You won't finish the game with the same character you started with. Obn the plus side, you do get to pass things on to your heirs (assuming you have any), including 1/10 of your Glory. It follows a combination of sources. Mallory is the primary source, but it dips into the French romances, and earlier Celtic tales to flesh it out. Newer sources, such as White and the film Excalibur are also influences to a lesser extent Magic in most editions of the game is left up to the GM to handle. You get more story based stuff than the flash bang spells of D&D or the utilitarian spells of RQ Battle Magic. Think Celtic Magic, with Farie Knights, Enchanted Weapons, Holy Miracles, Glamour,etc. 4th edition did have a playable magic system, but PC that wielder magic had to pay for the energy requirement spending weeks in magical slumber (Remember the bit in Excalibur when Merlin claims to have slept 9 moons because of what he did for Uther? That's just about right for that magic in the game!). Failure to do so in a timely manner means making an aging roll for each week missed. There aren't any magic shops, and enchanted items, do exist but they are few and far between. Most characters won't have any. Those who do will chresish them and past them on to their sons. Yes. They can and they will. Quite a few adventures revolve around just that. The new version (6th Edition, which is the same as 5th),especially with the expansion supplements expands upon lots of things (just about everything), but that is sort of a mixed blessing. You get more detail but somethings take longer. You get more detailed character creation and more options, but it takes longer to write up a character, you get more detailed battles, but they take longer to play out, you get more detailed land management, but the Winter Phase takes longer to play. So it's a bit of a trade off. The nice part is that the supplements are all optional, basically expanding on whats in the core book, so you don't have to use any of them, can pick and choose, or even port them back to earlier editions. The bad part is that often the core 6th edition versions aren't as detailed as 4th edition (for example, you only get the pick method for generating characters in the core rules and need a supplement to get random rolls, or to come from someplace other than than Salisibury). Pendragon is probably more backwards compatible than RQ, CoC or Stormbringer. Not much has really changed over the years except for Glory awards and chargen. 4th edition is less detailed than core 6th edition, but a bit more "complete". Starting Characters aren't quite as powerful as in 6th edition. 4th does have a playable magic system though. But if someone is really looking to cast a lot of magic, this isn't the game for it. 3rd edition is the same as 4th but without the magic system, or the chargen for character from outside of Salisbury.. If you do get 3rd of 4th then look for the Boy King supplement, for some good chargen rules for your early characters. You don't need it, but it helps. 2nd edition had much weaker characters, and 1st weaker still. Most of what is in those editions, especially Glory awards and NPC stats, was revised in supplements or later editions. IMO the choice is probably between the current edition (6th) and 4th. Maybe 3rd if you can get it for a bargain. Whatever edition you decide on, make sure to pick up the Great Pendragon Campaign supplement. In a nutshell, it's a full 80 year campaign. You could run an entire campaign with just the GPC. You could add more adventures, swap out adventures, take some out whatever, but you can get by with just the GPC. Plus it gives you a feel for the game better than anything else.

Update: I think I can reconcile the different Structure ratings for the ships in Pirate of Legend. Something I read at the library pointed out that ships increased in size by about a third in each century from the 15th to the 17th. So if the Young Kingdom "Brig" is a early pre-Brig then it would be smaller and have fewer structure points than one from the Age of Sail.