Atgxtg

A question for those who have the Paladin RPG. How useful would Pladin and/or Paladin Adventures be for a standard Pendragon campaign? I know there are a few rule tweaks to better fit the literature on Charlemagne, but does any if it make sense for a Pendragon campaign? I wondering if Paladin is worth picking up by a Pendragon GM who isn't planning on running the Charlemagne setting, and if any of the adventures are worth adapting to an Arthurian setting.

In which case it's not a challenge, is it? That's the crux of the matter. If a situation is supposed to be a challenge then it needs to be presented in such a way that it actually challenges the character, thus a rating relative to the PCs abilities. If, on the other hand, a situation isn't supposed to be a challenge, then there is no need to roll, and rolling is probably redundant. So, assuming that a GM expects to keep challenging the PCs as the campaign goes on, the opponents will have to continually get better to keep things challenging. It's a drawback on ever increasing scores and a relative scale. Not that the alternative (a fixed scale) doesn't have it's own drawbacks.

I believe it. In that same campaign another PK wound up a King of aminor kindom in the Perlious Forest (what Pendragon used to reffer to as a Pennath). He had to drop out of competing in tournamnets after a few years, as his ransom would ruin him -especially as he won the kingdom in a poor state and it was barely supporting him to begin with. Possibly, but I think it would be easier to just go to a different tournament where Sir So & So won't be. For the most part the great knights are't a problem, as they tend be be outnumbered by the ordinary knights, and so anyone who is worried that Lancelot is going to crimp his style can usually rack up a few wins in the preliminary rounds. The big jouster in my old campaign pretty much always came out ahead by the time he was eliminated. The two highlights of his jousting career was when he went three passes against Lancelot (he subsequently lost on foot), and when he "defeat" Gawain. Gawain fumbled, accidentally slew the PK's horse, and felt so bad about it that he gave the PK his brand new, and not generally available suit of partial plate. He also took an interest in the PKs career, as did a young (still good) Morded.

Yeah, and if they want to build on anything unusual that occurred, or add in new and different elements. In one of my previous Pendragon campaign's I adapted a Prince Valiant adventure into the feud, with one of the PKs stepping in to protect a lad accused of witchcraft, and thwarting a knight from Levcomagus. This made the feud more personal and intense, and culminated in the PK's forces accidentally besieging Levcomagus.

Because they did level up with the PCs in D&D. That is the thing about rating challenges relative to the PC abilities in order to keep them relevant. While on the one hand it always ensures a challenge, on the other hand it tends to destroy reliability and verisimilitude. The classic example is a high level D&D campaign, where the PCs are either running into a lot more high level threats than the setting supports, or they are wiping out whole populations of lesser threats. Except if you are running a game used HQ2+ rules that rate the challeges relative to the abilites of the PCs, they are. It's not like a PC can get so good in the game that they become above most opponents. Sorry but it doesn't work that way. Nobody runs a game where the rogue isn't challenged by locks anymore, instead the up the quality of the locks in order to keep the character challenged, and the players interested. .

The richest PK I ever saw in any of my campaigns was one who "survived off the tourney circuit". The potential income from the tourney circuit is incredible and puts most other ways of generating income to shame. A knight with a high lance skill can enter a tourney, beat two or three opponents then loose, and come out ahead two ransoms, two chargers, and two sets of armor. Since this is all "extra" income the knight can make more in five years on the tourney circuit that he will make elsewhere. A really good knight can make two to three times that, or more. The PK is my old campaign had Lance 27, and Sword 22 or so and had more accumulated wealth than he ever needed. The only real limit is the availability of "money tournaments". Now in theory, in KAP5, there would be a lot of knights going broke raising all those ransoms and replacing their armor and horses, on £1-2 discretionary funds, after a tournament.

The major insight, just in case you don't already know about it, is that this whole incident is what sets off the feud between Salisbury and Levcomagus. As far as gossip goes, I tend to use intrigue rolls to see just what information the player knights get and how accurate it is. I've fond that a few "not quite correct" rumors can spice up a game session. Especially if the things that the players see can support those rumors.

Since most of the cultures are the same as in Pendragon, how difficult would it be to adapt the rules from Knights & Ladies to Paladin?

Not, but it is a potential risk that anyone who wants to cover the setting should be aware of. For RP purposes the more diverse the mix of culture the better. One of the things that I liked about the KAP region books was how it detailed the different culture in a region. So there was more to the Irish and Saxons that just being Irish or Saxon. Maybe one day that stuff can be updated to KAP5/K&L? But anyway, adding more to the cultures in distant lands sounds good to me. It will generally be relegated to a sideshow in a typical KAP campaign, but even so it adds richness and depth to them when an d if a GM runs an adventure with them.

To put in my 2d, it's really about contest and status. The idea is that a knight should not be doing work that is beneath is station., and generally speaking, he can probable resolve a situation without having to resort to doing something beneath his station. Regarding your specific cases: Anything that would be considered un-knightly behavior. Note that, as in Morien's example, whom a knight does a task for can affect if it is knightly or not. Possibly. Honor as a passion is a characteristic of the character and so could be affected without witnesses, but witnesses would certainly make the situation worse and harder to recover from. Yes-at least for every occasion that would warrant it. Well first off commoners generally didn't chop wood for fires but instead were allowed to gather fallen branches and other dead wood. So it's doubtful that an old lady would have dragged home pieces to large for her to break up. But let's assume that she either got sick, or that someone else got the firewood, but isn't around to chop it up. In that case, the knight would probably order his squire to do it. If a knight didn't have a squire then he was probably already gathering his own wood while camped out. This all assumes the old woman lives in a remote spot (in which case how did she get the firewood?), if she lives in a village the knight could just order a villager to do it. That's not happening. First assuming the Knight and the Saxons get along, then he probably is paying them for passage, and passengers don't muck in with the crew, not are the expected to. If he's nbot paying for passage then he must be a guest of a Saxon Jarl or Thegn, as and such wouldn't be expected to muck in. If, he is just a member of the crew, then he is acting beneath his station and would indeed loose honor. But in general there really shouldn't be a situation where the knight is expected to muck in with the crew, expcet maybe in a survival type station, and then there might be glory to it. In the first case the knight probably has another way to get the firewood, and in the second -2 doesn't seem steep enough. He's behaving like a common sailor, and not a knight. Probably a lot more than that. A knight who has to tend his own fields has mismanaged his lands tot he point where he could be considered negligent in his duties and his liege could take the land away. Probably not. Even a Knight with Modest 20, is still a knight and thus better than a commoner in they eyes of medieval people. Some leeway can be given tot he clergy, but in general this falls back tot he divine right of kings, that medieval people believed in. Basically nobles are nobles because God wants them to be, and the social order is His will. So a knight doing something beneath his station, even out of generously or kindness is basically going against God's will, and defying his Liege Lord (who in turn gets his title and positions due to the will of God). I think the reason why -2 seems step to you is because you are looking at this from a modern perspective. To the medieval mind these things are dishonorable, and need to be viewed in that light. So it's comparable to things like to kidnapping, rape (of a noblewoman, note that raping a commoner isn't considered to be a big deal), or killing an unarmed holy man.

Yes, especially as so much got lost or mixed up along the way.

Yeah it's one of those situation where an author doesn't want to offend anybody but also doesn't want to ignore what is a bit influence on the culture of a people. It's a bit easier with Christian because Christians accept that a lot of bad things were done in the Church's name, especially before the industrial revolution. Now the Pnedragon camapign is technically set ina time before the founding of Islam, but it has alot of medieval anachronisms, including knights going to fight in the Holy Land.

Exaclty. And it is a good exmaple of why we shouldn't just take the GPC as gospel. Greg's tinkering was always with the idea of giving us a better game.

Yup. Oodles. Although just who sits on the Supreme Collgium would probably be whoever was the King of Logres. He does manage to get Eagle Hill Castle in Dorsette, according to Warlord. And Duke Elaris, and King Uther also have holdings there. I suspect Senator Robustus of Durnvaria (Dorchester) is the one who holds the seat on the Supreme Collegium. So there would be an heir tot he Baron of Marlborough. Probably underage for part of the anarchy. I wonder if a regent can sit on the Supreme Collegium?

Yes but I believe you statment that "You don't Need it, But.." you quote is wrong. I believe, that like it or not, a Pendragon GM really has do a little homework. Not a lot, but some. They should at least read though some version of the tale that is reasonably consistent with the general story and characters. A version of Le Morte is probably best, but any of the versions with easier to graps writing that reamins true to the story, as opposed to a reimagining of it, is fine. I beleive without that, a GM is probably going to flub it badly. King Arthur is so well known, that many of the things about the story that are generally known, aren't actually true. Many of these were the result of filmmakers having to simply and condense things to squeeze things into a 2 hour film. Morgan Le Fey is almost never represented correctly, and is ususally beleived to be Mordred mother, rather than his aunt. Becuase I think your assumption that these things are about history vs. the narrative. They're not. They are ususally about which version of the narrative to use. Since Greg often tinkered, and altered things, even after the GPC came out, and since each Pendragon GM has to keep their campaign fresh and interesting, they shouldn't just discount stuff becuase of what's in the GPC. Sometimes ite GPC can be improved upon. A good example is Hengest. In the GPC he lives to a ripe old age, but in most sources (these being literary sources, not anything historically accurate) he is killed in 469 after the battle of KaerConan/Coinsborough. Now since one of those sources was the HRB, and since that was used as the second primary book for the timeline behind Le Morte, especially for the Book of Sires, then it is a good thing that officially Hengest's death got retconned to 469.

LOL. The Welsh stuff is also some of the earliest stuff and so much of it was replaced or retconned later. Still there tend to be remnants from it in latter works that are more understandable if you know the origin, such as Gawain strength waxing and waning with the day. Yes, which is why when something comes up you (and several others) often know of additional part of the story or alternate versions, or reasons why some odd stuff happens.

Well first off I'd suggest dropped Earl. It derives from the Anglo-Saxon title of Jarl, and probably doesn't work for Cymric Lords. That's why the Earl of Salisbury was reconnected into the Count of Salisbury. I'd suggest going with Count, Praetor or Baron. Hampshire seems to be the demesne of the High King. Dorset falls to King Idres around 500. There is a sheriff two Barons, and a Duke who hold castles there but I don't know just whom is in charge before that. It would probably be a Roman. For Malborough, I'd suggest Sir Dryw, Baron of Sparrowhawk. In Book of Warlord, when some of the place names were temperality changed, Marborough was renamed Sparrohawk. So Dryw is your man and he is a Baron.

Nothing.. Nor does anything prevent them from painting the tips of their weapons red so they can be used with a red tip. Ten seconds and a roll of red electrical tape. Still, I'm not sure if the bad guys have much to gain by groing around with a red tipped weapon in the first place. It might help a lone gunman with a non-concealable weapon, but a half dozen guys going into the bank, with red tipped shotguns, wearing ski masks are probably going to get the same reaction. The idea behind the law was that it would prevent accidental shootings of kids because everyone would recognize that they had a toy gun and not a real one. If it actually accomplished it's goal or not is debatable And then of course there are all the plastic "combat knives" and such going around that are all grey.. I look at it as another one of those "Do something/feel good" laws that are made with good intentions to try to solve a problem but probably don't really improve the situation. If a teenager on a dark night, is 30 feet away,, carry something shaped like a firearm, well, I doubt anyone will spot the red tip.

I still got a copy of Steve Jackson's Killer, which I believe was basically the same idea. Toy firearms in the US today all have red tips to prevent people from accidentally shooting kids who are too young or naive to realize that not everyone knows they are just kids playing with toys. In my gaming experience, PCs carrying around and showing more firepower/armor works against them. Since this is an RPG, some bad guys will end up fighting them, and if they have any knowledge of the PCs and their armaments, they will arm themselves suitable to deal with he PCs weapons, if they can. So if the PCs are wearing Level III armor that can stop handgun rounds, the bad guys will make sure they have rifles capable of penetrating Level III vests. So the PCs take more damage than if they didn't show off their armor. A PC walking around with a flamethrower or light machinegun ends up drawing more fire than everybody else, because no one wants to get set afire or mowed by by a stream of bullets. So showing off you armor and weapons, really just tells everyone else to go big or go home, and in an RPG, somebody will opt not to go home.

I'm saying that the distiction is about which version of the King Arthur legend GMs lean towards. Not historical vs. literary/romantic. For instance jeffjerwin seems to draw more from the Welsh sources than the French ones. So much of what he brings up is from eailer sources and has a differernt feel than the latter stuff. No one has to be a scholar of any type to run or play Pendragon. I do think they should read at least one version of the tale, even it if is one of the modern adaptations aimed at younger readers, such as a Howard Pyle adaptation. But reading some of Mallory is advisable, and the HRB and other sources help, but are certainly not required reading. It all helps, especially to explain some of the wierder things that happen in the GPC. Yes the can, but I doubt they will really appreaciate it without knowing a little more. It's one of the reasons why the game expanded in KAP3 to explain knighthood and how knights live in more detail. Without some understanding of the setting a KAP campaign can easily turn into another FRPG game. Okay. I contradict you. I think that unless a GM has some familiarity with Arthruian literature and knights they just won't do the game justice. They might be able to handle the game mechanics but they game they run won't bear much relation to King Arthur Pendragon. That's not the point I'm contradicting. The one I will contradict is that "playing the game can work fine without it.". If someone hasn't read anything about King Arthur or knights then chances are it probably won't work out fine. I've seen more than one KAP GM run a shambles of a campaign, turning it into sort of D&D setting due to a complete leack of understanding about the setting, and the ways things work. I'm not saying a GM needs to read much, but they have to know something about the setting other than just what is in the core book and GPC. The GPC hints at a lot of stuff based on the assumption that the GM will know what is going on. It's why most of the adventures list their sources-so the GM can read up on them. So I think a certina amount of reading a research is expected of a Pendragon GM.

They might.In the real world. Aa friend of mine brother once turned a lot of heads by walking around with an SMG. Apparently he was a Nacy SEAL and didn't see what the big problem was- but he did get everybody's attention. Some of the issues with going around armed, are as follows: It makes everyone nervous as they wonder why you have those weapons and what/whom are you going to use them on. It make Law Enforcement worried since they are the ones who will probably have to confront you should you start using said weapons. Doubly worried if you are better armed than they are. It tends to increase the armament of any opponents. Basically no one wants to get catch bring a knife to a plasma SMG fight. So if the PC are walking around carrying portable chain guns, the opposition will do their best to do the same, or better. This tends to up the body count on both sides. It ups the ante for anyone who might, for some reason, decide to attack you. This also tends to up the body count on both sides. If a PC is walking around with a plasma machine gun, nuclear hand grenade, lightsaber, etc. then anyone who is going to attack him is probably going to try to make sure the PC doesn't get a chance to use it. So somebody who might have just bonked a PC over the head and move on now hits them with everything that have in order to prevent the PC from being able to use their weapon, once., because once is more than enough.

Which is probably why it was included in K&L instead of some other appropriate culture. Often in KAP we had a choice of cultures to use in a region. Which makes it both acceptable and safe to include. By not really representing any one culture it doesn't really reflect upon any real culture.

Unless he is wearing something beneath the mail for padding/anti-chaffing

I suggest looking at history, and not just recent history. Back when societies allowed people to walk around armed. So you could have something like the Old West, or something like the Renaissance or age of enlightenment, when people dueled, and tended to be very polite.

I suspect it's more a case of making them different. Generally players like to have little unque things about characters, and religion is one of the ways characters can be customized in Pendragon. Yeah, and I think that helps to explain both why a region/culture book would be nice, and why such doesn't really work as mainstream Pendragon. Basically every people have an interesting culture with lots of rich local lore to draw from, but most of it isn't Arthurian in nature and so has to take a back seat in Pendragon. Oh, and you might want to include such things as the dog-headed Kynokephaloi and headless Acephali in book. I've considered throwing them into an adventure in Africa. I agree and there is a little in game evidiece to support this. In one of the tournaments I believe Greg lists either Prince Valiant or Prince Arn as a participant (it's a throw away line). Now Greg was a fan of Hal Foster's Prince Valiant strip, and wrote the Prince Valiant RPG in addition to Pendragon. In the comic strip a storm causes Val to wind up in North America. Val even brings back a few natives, including a maid. So I think the Americas are there, just that it would take exception circumstances for characters to get there, or to come from there., and that it would be another "non-knightly" culture. I've read/heard that the Player Magican can at time co-opt the group to go on an adventure for him, similar to how Merlin does it to PKS from time to time. But it's been some time since we got any news on the Pendragon front.