creativehum

6 hours ago, Tizun Thane said:

At the end of Knights Adventurous, there is a double page of Greg Stafford explaining what he thought of Joseph Campbell and the arthurian mythos.

I forgot all about bout that! I'll be looking at that over breakfast! Thanks!

1 hour ago, Morien said:

Just to add to the already excellent answers... Greg was adamant that HRB, as much as possible, was the true history of KAP Britain, not a garbled fable mixing myth and history. 

Can you unpack this for me a bit. After sorting out what "HRB" stands for (Historia Regum Britanniae) I did a little research and discovered it begins with Athena guiding Brutus to Britain where he defeats giants and clears the land for human civilization.

I'm not contradicting, you, only trying to understand: It certainly seems like myth and history mixing here? Or do you mean something else?

3 hours ago, David Scott said:

Greg had a single volume of Mallory's book, he went through it and underlined all the passion and trait contests. He then wrote the matching Pendragon contests in the margin - Love god, Chaste/Lustful, etc. I only saw it once - in 1994. It was like the secret of playing Pendragon in a book.

Following up on this, I'm in the back half of reading Le Morte D'Arhtur right now, and it is amazing to me how much the KAP rules are built to mimic the tale well beyond even the perfect rules for Traits.

There are so many incidents from the book that seem lifted straight from the rules in motion: a Passion roll that lets a knight return from apparent defeat to a vital victor, critical hits, the reflexive combat rules, the damage rules, the rules for getting knocked off a horse, the reach for religious or chivalrous traits and the same ambitions befouled by a need to avenge family members, feuds that last generations, and many small.

What is amazing (and Greg talked about this in one of the panels I linked to above) a Player need not have read Le Morte D'Arthur to end up enacting scenes in the game that might come straight out of a passage from Le Morte D'Arthur. Simply by engaging with the rules all sorts of events will unfold directly from the book.

6 minutes ago, David Scott said:

I'd also recommend his Quora answers, they are a great insight: https://www.quora.com/profile/Greg-Stafford-7

Scott, I was typing my previous reply when you posted your posts. 

Thank you for this!

Thank you for the replies!

To be clear: I'm familiar with the reading lists in KAP. (I started playing back in 1990 with KAP 3rd.) I've read a good share of the books, many of them because of that reading list.) Interesting, the list has thinned since third edition!

The books on the current list are either books of non-fiction about feudal society or (apart from Malory) more recent tellings of the Arthurian tales. None of them approach the stories with the kind of analysis we might expect to find, say, in someone like Joseph Campbell.* That is the kind of thing I was asking about.

But I think Jeff's response really nails it down: the tales are right there, he thinks they are of value, the game is method to interact with the tales.... volition!.. myth at the table!

_____

* I'm curious now what Greg thought of Joseph Campbell!

Hello All, 

A question for people who might have links, references, or talked to Greg about these matters specifically. 

Since the first edition of King Arthur Pendragon the game has used Malory's Le Morte D'Arthur as it's bedrock. A text of both gritty, grounded textures ("and therewith Sir Arthur ran to him, and smote him on the helm, that his sword went unto his teeth, and the knight sank down to the earth dead") but also of magic, faith, and supernatural wonders.

When Greg spoke of RPGs in panels or interviews he constantly speaks of RPGs as a portal for myth. For example, he addresses the matter in this GenCon panel with Ken Hite as he discusses The Great Pendragon Campagin, and a second panel with Stafford, Hite, and Lillian Cohen-Moore about Gaming as Mythic Exploration.

In the second linked panel Greg said:

Quote

Greg: I have a couple of games that draw heavily on mythology. I’ll start with Pendragon first. King Arthur is one of the best-known heroes in the western world. I’ve heard he’s the second best-selling character after Jesus and Yayweh. But, those are part of the King Arthur myth as well. My purpose in creating Pendragon was to make that mythology come alive. One of the characteristics of mythology is that it’s abstract. It’s not always real. It deals with idealism while there is a physical aspect of it, like the Midgard Serpent. At the same time, the ideals of chivalry are an important thing. That’s a legend. A myth. And King Arthur’s the manifestation of it. So, I wanted to make sure that the game had that manifestation of it in the play. You can have it as part of the background, but there’s no reason to do it if it doesn’t reward your character. 

I wanted the mythical themes to reward your character. So, if you’re chivalrous, I had to make up a system that quantifies chivalry. But, if you meet those quantities, then you get the Chivalry Bonus. But, the legend is more than that. It’s about knights and castles and the Holy Grail and all of those things, so I had to create the system to integrate those in a game system way without alienating the system or the setting. It’s generally agreed to be a pretty good resolution to those problems

The transcripts for both interviews are great (thank you for whoever did them!)

But I want to follow up and ask are there any sources where Greg discusses at greater length Arthur as Myth, or King Arthur Pendragon as myth at the gaming table? Or works of Arthur as Mythology that Greg used or referenced.

I'm especially curious as to anything @sirlarkins might be able to add here.

Thanks all!

@lordabdul, oh, okay. That make sense. I remember reading about that... what, 5 years ago? I haven't had a need to update my PDF (I have a  hard copy) but I had assumed Chaosium had already addressed the issue by now. But I guess not. 

1 hour ago, lordabdul said:

the (controversial) Argan Argrar Atlas.

Why? -- how? -- is the Argan Argar Atlas controversial?

But the Referee should establish, once the knights are recognized from Gomeret, that Gomeret is hostile to Arthur and Logres. That is implied in the adventure text, but never explained. So any justification the Referee wants can do.

And so... mystery solved!

Yes, I was thinking maybe Savage Mountains. 

But I haven't opened that for years.

I use KAP core rules and GPC asa bedrock for the details of play.

all supplemental material is there for me to cherry pick and use as extra details as I find inspiring and more fun. But never as something requires more work when it comes to squaring one with the other. (Like the shift in all the names!)

My guess is someone is about to arrive with a link or two going back a Nocturnal Forum where changes in the Collegium were hashed out. But I was never part of the Nocturnal forum discussions.

In general, I've realized, if I need a link back to a forum for certain kinds of fans of KAP to use the supplemental materials I'm not going to concern myself with those supplemental materials.

I have a question about  the adventure:

The PKs meet knights from Gormeret. The text states:

Quote

“Hail good knights!” says the leader. “Do you seek to enlist?”

Of course, this begins a rather dangerous conversation. The Player-knights will wish to know: “enlist for what?” One of the Gomeret knights rather foolishly states, “For the conquest of Castle of the Kite!” He is silenced by their leader, who then wants to know, “What are you doing here if you have not come to enlist?”

If the Player-knights are evasive, the other knights become suspicious and quickly turn hostile. If the Player-knights state they are heading towards the Castle of the Kite, the Gomeret knights become immediately hostile. Weapons are drawn and they fall upon the Player-knights. If the knights lie, perhaps saying they are just traveling through, they get a Deceitful check and the Gomeret leader warns them that evil lies ahead and they ought to take a road north to Gomeret instead. If the knights agree, they are Out of the Adventure—they will eventually be recognized as Logres knights, captured, and given to King Maelgwyn of Gomeret for ransom. However, if they insist on continuing on, the now-suspicious Gomeret knights get hostile and draw weapons.

I've looked into both KAP 5.2 as well as the GPC and I can't find anything about hostilities between Gomeret and Logres or Gomeret and Arthur. So I'm not sure why discovery they are from Logres will lead them to be captured if they choose to join the Gomeret knights. After all the PKs are planning on the conquest of the Castle of the Kite (in one manner of speaking), so why does alleging themselves with other knights with the same enemy cause them to be held for ransom? And why is being from Logres the trigger for being captured?

Thanks!

I have always played it you apply the bonus from the Passion before dividing. 

Thanks!

It's gorgeous. And thank you for providing layers that'll let us make it printer friendly as well!

So far the KAP adventure is the only gameline I can find for download? Am I missing something? Or are the other game line's for the other adventures coming soon?

Again, and without doubt, it makes perfect sense to mix up the historical along with the fictional sources. (And thank you for the reference. I was certain Atgxtg must have seen it somewhere in a KAP product.)

What we're talking about, however, is the proportion of "historical" vs. Mallory.

I just reviewed the text of KAP1... and the notion that it somehow emphasized history over fictional sources (specifically Le Morte D'Arthur) and that the game line shifted more toward Mallory over time is simply not supported by the actual words found in the core rules of KAP1.

The fact that several historical points are stitched into other products is part of the fun of this kind of project, of course. (But also note the details found for Camelot in the KAP1's Book of Nobels. The castle is of a size that would render the notion anything historical is going on in the setting out of bounds.)

A few references to ground the game in our actual world (a thing most fantasy RPGs never have to do!) hardly makes the focus of the game historical.

The fact remains that the glosses in both KAP1's Player's Book and Gamemaster's Book are stuffed with passages from Le Morte D'Arthur used to explain the game, the game's world, and the spirit of intended play.

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

I think there is still a shift towards using more Mallory over time. Back in KAP1 Greg used Cadbury Castle for Camelot, more in keeping with historical Arthur per knowledge  at the time. With KAP3 Greg shifted to using Mallory as his primary source,and followed Mallory on more things. 

Listen, this isn't a big deal. And I want you to play the kind of game you want to play. So I'm not trying to provoke any kind of argument. Simply point out some things for folks who might be coming into KAP cold.

Back in KAP1 the text refers to Camelot, not Cadbury. The word Cadbury does not appear in either the core rules or the Book of Nobles. I'm not saying there wasn't another product at the time that referred to Cadbury, or a discussion or mailing the Greg got involved with didn't refer to Cadbury. But in the texts themselves Camelot is used. 

The references in KAP1 almost all fictional references. 

This is the second paragraph of KAP1's Player's Book: 

Quote

The game world of King Arthur Pendragon (hereafter known as Pendragon) is a place of high chivalry and glittering armor. Based on the pioneering works of Chretien de Troyes, the French Vulgate texts, and Malory’s Le Morte d’Arthur, it is a land where jousting and romance are the common sports and killing enemies is daily work. In this arena Christian virtues struggle to vanquish savage passions and worldly motives. Characters are clothed in noble court fashions, and equipped with medieval customs and morals.

In the Bibliography only a couple of the books might be considered "historical" (Geoffrey of Monmouth's The History of the Kings of Britain, The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Gildas's De Excidio Brittaniae, and Nennius's Historia Brittonum.) The other books are all straight up fiction.

Of Le Morte D'Arthur Stafford notes: "Malory’s book is the basic text for the Pendragon campaign."

The fact is, the text, the ideas, and the overall ethos of the game is barely changed from KAP1 to KAP3.

The game has always been about the legends of Arthur and his knights as portrayed within literature. And a lot of the literature is grounded in concrete details of history and fact. (Mallory was a knight, after all, and brings that to bear on his book.) And as I pointed out above, that tension between the mundane and the ideal is a vital feature of the game. (Stafford talks about this at length in the Designer Notes -- though it was made explicit in the text of earlier editions of the game as well.)

The focus of the game from the beginning has been on the literature and the legends of Mallory. It is what the Traits and Passions are all about (built straight out of moments from Le Morte D'Arthur) as well as all the ahistorical details that support the setting built into every edition.

Now I know a lot of people want more history in their Pendragon game. And certainly Greg and others moved in that direction with a lot more expanded details about history and daily life minutia in many of the KAP5 supplements. And it is great that these materials are there to support that.

But the text of KAP1 suggests that the game is, and always was, at it heart, about emulating the fictional legends found in the tales.

On 7/19/2019 at 6:49 AM, Atgxtg said:

KAP5 seemed to be shifting thing further towards a more feudal,  Norman Britain with more of the dark and gritty historical stuff coming back, even if it was from a later period of history.

I think the KAP 5 core rules explore this tone and style and history... but that is in part beacuse the core rules start at a specific time in "Arthurian History" (air-quotes used on purpose.)

If you follow through the GPC however, you'll end up with all all the flavor and romance that KAP 3rd celebrated. 

Stafford lists Mallory as the primary influence and inspiration of every edition of the game. And Mallory's world of Arthur is always a mix of the mundane concern of knights (broken tacks and sword strokes into the skull and "to the teeth") with all sorts of miracles and romance. This tension is also part of the core mechanics (in the Traits) and in GPC's course of history from grim and dangerous to all sorts of magic and ahistorical customs.

I think Stafford stitched this aspect of Mallory's work into the game and the GPC at every level. Even when one style of "history"/Romance dominates one of the Phases, the mix and tension of mundane and miraculous, historical and ideal, and grim and Romantic is always there.

More thoughts: 

Mythras has clear and robust rules for handling different kinds of magic, including Theistic magic. Which involves temple obligations and such. Again, rules are already in place to port Glorantha over to Mythras.

In addition, Rune points (a feature I like) can be added to Mythras, and so on.

The key thing is: A rule book where, when I turn to a rule to explain something to my players as we learn the rules, the rules are clear and make sense and cross-reference clearly to other notable rules is apparently something I really like!

10 hours ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

how will you implement runalité?

Much in the same way RQG does. The two games are kissing cousins and porting ideas back and froth is easy-peasey.

Mythras has Passions in the same way RQG does, as well as Augments: You apply 20% of the Passion's value as an Augment. RQG adds Runic scores for PCs that are effectively Passions. The Runes can only be used in circumstances tied to the Rune's qualities. Adding the same mechanical element to Mythras is trivial.

As I've said from the day I started pouring over RQG there is a lot to love in the game. But it is badly written and many of the rules seem ill-concieved. (I say this with someone as no experience of previous RQ editions. I was simply a guy who bought a game, read it, and thought, "What the hell happened here?")

My idea here is to take the parts of the RQG rules and setting details I like and work them through the Mythras rules... which seem clear and easy to use. 

I am not sure if I've answered all specific details you wanted to know about, but that's the broad approach. 

1 hour ago, Qizilbashwoman said:

how will you implement runalité?

Do you mean by that all things Runic?

I'm thinking about using the Mythras rules for Glorantha.

I found the fantastic Notes from Pavis the other day.

I couldn't find a listing of starting skills by culture. 

But I assume I could simply port the Culture and Professional skills form RQG. 

Also: the site has the amazing listing of Cult Onepagers, which refer to the cult spells from RQ2. Would there be any downside to porting in spells from RQG?

Thanks so much!

Third edition's core rules still holds a place in my heart for the most beautiful and elegant RPG ever.

Might have to jump in on this!

speaking of which -- any chance for maps? Especially the color maps from 3rd edition? (They might have been used again in 4th -- I can't remember.)

40 minutes ago, YwainDigsLions said:

I used the charts and rules at the back of KAP 5.2 for the Battle of Salisbury in 480 during our second session of the GPC, and it seemed to work just fine. Is there any reason I would want to get the Book of Battle or Book of Armies for future battles?

I know I am posting this on the house forum for these products. I know also that popele who wrote these products, put a lot of work into them, and care about them, post on these threads.

But -- no. There is no reason if you are satisfied with KAP rules to switch to the supplements. As I've stated elsewhere, the rules of KAP work fine. (I do think 5.x edition's addition of Christian Knights gums up the math on Religious and Chivalrous bonuses a bit, but I simply cut them back out.)

Adding in the rules from the GPC and you are good to go. The rules are fine.

Some tabletop gamers are invenerate tinkerers. I say this not as a slight, but as a fact. And I've noticed that most of the people who talk about the supplements are also always talkinga about how they tweak the supplements to make them work. 

The fact is, every GM of KAP (along with the Players) needs to sort out how much effort/extra doodads they need to be happy running the game. Me? As above, I'm fine with KAP, the GPC, and that's all. It's all you need to have a great time.

I probably will add in a few details from Knights & Ladies if something adds more fun. And I'll pick up the Book of Feasts and the cards when I start the next campaign because it sounds up my alley. 

But at the baseline... if you are satisfied, stick with what is working. If and when you want more detail/options for the game you can go down that road. But it isnt needed.

No reply yet. But I'm sure Ian is busy. He'll answer when he has time to answer. But I am very curious!