Algesan

Heh, look up Hammers' Slammers original book and check out David Drake's discussion about his version of a "blaster". He gets into the advantages of both projectile and energy weapons for combat. OTOH, like *any* kind of FTL (and much other common SF trope tech), it departs from "hard" science and works on theorycrafting based on the theory that is currently popular and/or fits the author's story. Of course, add in the law of unintended consequences...Star Trek wasn't supposed to have a transporter, it was too "magical", but it wasted time for them to do the shuttle sequence every time during the first season, so they added it in for a faster way to move the characters.... Which version of Kirk? Of course, the TNG and after mostly blew the original layout of Kirk away, except for the fact that he was supposed to be the first Fed captain to complete a five year mission without losing his ship or over half his crew. One thing I appreciated about Enterprise, it was all fun and games, but when it got serious, yep, Archer lost mass quantities of crew. However, the fun write up for the obvious Star Wars connection was there in one of the Traveler supplements.

I'm using the Cthulhu Fantasy character generation file (I'll look for the link in downloads if you cannot find it). The standard Classic Fantasy for the core rules (BRB, BGB, whatever) didn't strike my interest, although I did include a version of the "Spell Lore" skill for a player who likes to run mages. He is happy with it (started with a d6 + bonus, only gets a skill up roll if he rolls under it while casting a spell (which gives him a -1 to the POW cost) and then reworked the POW reduction to make it start lower and progress more smoothly. I have seen a copy of Mythras' Classic Fantasy and I'd say it is a much better version and more understandable even if you cut it off the RQ6 chassis and use it with the base rules. I'd actually probably have done that instead of the Cthulhu Fantasy, except I like the feel of the CF character generator and it works well with integrating a classic fantasy setting IMO. It would have also been a bit of a PITA to get around some of the "higher rank" think implied by the main Mythras system, but IIRC, you could just use the character creation and toss the rank stuff to the side. The class diversity is fun too. We have a Dark Elf Adept (uses some Super Powers with POW costs as physical enhancement "spells"), a Duelist/Pistoleer (no pistol. but has two Sorcery spells: the light spell and a damage bonus for his rapier) type swashbuckler and a Mage type (Elementalist I think) who is working on his staff skills some and learning a bunch of alchemy skills, at least enough to do some "field alchemy" with found herbs to make elixirs and poultices (weak potions, either slower acting or less effect). They are plowing through both some individual tough critters and swarms of low end humanoids. They have taken some hard hits, but mostly dodge and parry their way through. Biggest thing with the little fellers (kobolds & goblins), I use the spot rule that says if 2x Size then -20% to hit and if 1/2x Size then +20% to hit which makes those fights interesting since the entire party is in the 2x end. Not much, but an gives a small chance with a swarm of attacks to do a bit of damage. EDIT: Link for 36 Fantasy Characters I rolled up:

Look up Book of Knights, IIRC, it is "pay what you want" at DriveThruRPG. IIRC, you simply get 3 points a year for six years. You can use them to raise a trait (up to 19), a stat (up to max), a skill 1 point (if at 15+), or roll a d6 to generate skill points to raise skills up to 15. You can also only use one point a year to raise one thing a year....so if you need five more of Trait X, then you have to spend one point each year for five years. If you happen to need more than six points to get to the level you want, then you cannot get there. The background generation was different also, not as detailed, but better in some ways IMO, but then that depends more on the type of campaign I'm looking at running more than anything. Yes, it wasn't that big a change between rolled and allocated, the biggest thing was the presentation which made the current secondary option not so obvious.

Hush! You will break the memes of certain groups of people who consider this heresy on a grand scale against their worldview!

I will note that core mechanics of gameplay appear not to have changed and at least in a surface manner, many things have not, but.... I do see a shifting emphasis in some of these sources and when A recommends you roll dice for everything (but offers other options) and B recommends you allocate points (but recommends other options) and C gives a totally different way to handle the years of "squiredom" ("squirehood"?), it starts to get a bit fuzzy. I just fall back on the old school gaming convention of I make it up to work for my world (which was actually required back in the day because the rules were so fuzzy, but absolutely SUX when you see a GM haul out that excuse to bust the balance of a game that has matured and has a recognizable system) which does the job. I've been looking at character creation mainly, with a side onto lands. That is where I'm seeing the differences. BoK, BoK&L, 5.2, etc. All of them have differences, mainly in backgrounds and how you derive those backgrounds... GKAP Campaign book added some too (I think) where every player gets to Hate Saxons...even though Saxons are a playable knight class (good RP potential there) Then there are the various versions of Book of Manor vs Book of Estate (there actually seems to have been a recodifying of all this stuff going on with some of the later books), etc. DrivethruRPG has a "Leather Books of Pendragon" bundle for them, these seem to be the latest and greatest. I've also seen these quotes in an online discussion at rpg.net: Heh, slightly different take on the two books there, although I find the second one to be more useful. From a user named Kligs:

ROFL. My favorite part of this is that if you go by the standard accepted version of history, there were several waves of immigration across the Alaska-Siberia land bridge and each wave came down conquering, slaughtering the men, "incorporating" the women and erasing the previous culture. Of course, the "first ones there" are the "real natives", but they have been so thoroughly wiped out and assimilated by multiple conquests, then you really cannot define "native" as "were here first" since those people are long gone. So, "native american" really only means "the people who happened to be here when the Europeans showed up. Of course, along a similar vein, those Europeans would not be "Europeans" by the same definition since they are themselves the end result of multiple migrations wiping out previous cultures....

Heh, having been going through and reading different versions (all relatively "late", that is not 1st, 2d or 3d Ed directly AFAIK) of different supplements and rulebooks, EVERYTHING in KAP has been in a constant state of flux for decades as Greg tinkered with the system. Given that and starting the basics of possibly running a campaign, I'm sticking with 5.2, but using parts of other versions to run the game. Different bits of the character creation come from different versions (that actually appear to be the SAME game version, but different methods) to both streamline the process and make it a bit more interesting (for my and my players' purposes) because some are too simplistic, some are too complicated and some are simply too strange. All that being said, I'd suggest you set the bar for the Chivalry bonus where you want it to be: 80, 13s (which is actually only 78 ), 84 (14s), 90 (15s) 96 (16s), etc.. Since I'm using the BoK (not BoK&L) "squire experience" rules as well as rolling 3d6 and pick the side you want it on for traits (the other trait subtracts the rolled number from 20), then it is fairly trivial for players to boost their numbers to hit whatever requirement is listed, if the numbers are higher, then a player who rolled poorly will end up with lower skills as they spend more on traits is all.

Condolences to the family and thanks for the times of fun that Mr. Stafford provided for those of us who played the games he brought to light.

Thanks to both of you on this one. I'll shelve it for now. This was just my Pendragon "day" and I was skimming my way through some stuff and taking notes. I'm putting it on my list to poke around for some charts online and see what the accounting they entail is. Having played a number of games with heavy accounting loads, it isn't too bad if it can be automated, but even if it cannot be and the players do want more accounting, then hand-wavium works early on and we can tag on the more complicated stuff later if they want it. Even if they do, the first few sessions would still be about RPing and combat, which fits n00b knights who don't have a wife yet. Thanks again, I'll probably have another question or two next week. Oh, for reference, I'm looking at running the starter appendix in the back of 5.2 (technically as squires, but fully trained ones) and then go into The Great Pendragon Campaign sequence with a knighting happening in there somewhere.

Okay, next question, what is the difference between Book of the Manor and Book of the Estate? Manor holdings seem to be a bit skimmed in the bundles, but from what I'm pulling together, each new player knight has a manor worth a base of 10L a year and only a few potential optional rolls (or luck roll goodies) alter that amount. Not much on how to build the all important fortifications (so the lady waifu can defend against the sieges of villains) or much else. Heh, I know one of my players will go for the 40 year old widow with the five manors available listed among the notable NPCs of Salisbury..... Oh, ugh, this is kind of important, because that one starter manor kinda sorta hand-wavishly covers the expenses of the player (and new lordling) along with his relative knights...and I guess the levies....but if a player does something like marrying the rich widow, now he has a bunch of manors that kinda sorta hand-wavishly cover the expense of the knights running each of those manors for him....but what generates the new income that he is now supposed to spend by "living large" with his wealth? <sigh> I might just hand-wavium all of this into "it kinda sorta supports you as much as you need". Heh.

Thanks, I'm going to be looking at the system more in the next week. Now, I'm trying to play some catch up elsewhere.... Delays in quests/missions are something I'm used to one way or another. Heck, my first "main" campaign ended up on hold for almost a month for a RL issue, which was fortunate since the player had managed to get the unholy crap shot out of himself (in a non-magic, WW2 tech hellhole at the arse end of nowhere) and get sidelined for another month of game time. Soooo, I simply gave him a couple of exp rolls per week in certain skills (book learning types of skills he could study while stuck in the hospital) after he got back some of his lost hit points to compensate for everyone else continuing to do missions buffing their combat abilities. I have time though, I don't see a Pendragon campaign going anywhere until next year sometime.

Haven't gotten that far into the system yet, but I did pick up that players should have an extra character or two rolled up for just such emergencies, as well as simply getting whacked. Although after a few game years that should take care of itself since the knight's first squire should be a knight also, usually having been knighted as a household knight by their "master".

Heh, the reference was more towards the core BRP system where you aren't enhancing skills, but having to figure out exactly what skills to buy.

This one. All I have it the BoK linked, The Pendragon Campaign QS rules, and the two bundles that were linked earlier. See, prayer works, I say "God, I wish I didn't have to spend so much money on this system" and someone links to the bundles in my price range . I don't have any issues with BoK&L from an informational standpoint, it is just laid out so badly compared to BoK. Something has been telling me that 4th Edition was the one I wanted, but surprisingly it cannot be found anywhere on the Net to download for a peek. The funniest part, using the Cthulhu Fantasy character creator I kept coming across these odd Lore skills that I could only link back to Pendragon, especially the 4th Edition. Right now I'm testing character creation and seeing if it "breaks" it to use some of the stuff from the BoK. Much cleaner (in one case) and flexible (in another case). Mostly using the family & inheritance system from BoK and letting everyone be a "knight" without worrying about dates (the game is anachronistic enough, so what's a bit more?) plus adding in the squire training system from BoK. I will be retaining some of the greater info from the BoK&L because it gives more character and the Expertise skills instead of cultural weapons. Will it work? Probably. I really think that in the end it won't matter too much either way. What I'm looking forward to is the potential for: Spring - go to court (or take care of other biz) and intrigue/romance to set up for Summer - quest/big tournament and then Fall - report back to court/go home/tie up loose ends intrigue/romance and ending up with Winter glory, exp, land gains. That sounds like a bit of fun.

Not so much "dug in", I'm only working character creation right now to fiddle with the system. It is something I do, make up the characters to find issues and options, then run a few combats against stock NPCs to get a feel for how the combat works. Yeah, you are right about the multiple publishers. As a side comment on the BRP system itself, the point allocation character creation stinks. It works great if I prebuild or use something like the Cthulhu Fantasy character generator and my players like that just fine. Converting characters over from d20 based systems worked out as well. Allocating points? It was seriously tedious as everyone worried about getting some kind of skill to at least have a roll vs. pushing as many skills to max so they were effective. {shrug} Might just be us, only two of the five us actually create our own Hero characters when we do that system, so that might be part of it, but quite frankly the best way I liked using the BRP system as is was to divide the Professional points by 10 and then give a flat bonus to 10 Professional skills, then divide the Personal points by 10 and pick 10 other skills to slot them in, although you could stack on top of your Professional skills if you wanted to.

I really think it isn't going to be too bad (except the oversimplified "squire" experience in the main book), just as soon as I can write up: 1. Start on page 16, roll or pick starting homeland 2. Go to page 17-X and roll on the appropriate chart for actual home. 3. Go to page ? and roll for this 4. Go to page ?? and look for that 5. Go to page ??? and roll for the other thing etc. Or probably go with shortening up the entire thing by changing up the order to match how players have been filling out character sheets since before Pendragon existed.

Might be, but supposedly the Book of Knights & Ladies is updated to 5th Edition standards and from the layout, look and feel of the Quick Start Book of Knights, I'd say it was based on 5th Edition as well. Ahhh, except for maybe the more straightforward and complete feeling character creation system in the BoK that doesn't resemble prebuilt clones that takes multiple page flips to fill out a number of items on the character sheet. Although there is that difference where quickstart gets a cultural "specialty weapon" and the BoK&L get special skills that replace other skills..... I'll put it this way, I'm almost finished with my 3d BoK&L (mainstream) character when in a similar amount of time going step by step through the rules in BoK (quick start), I'd finished 10 characters.

The problem with the Japanese culture is that it emphasized agility over sheer protection (although this was more of a physical issue that became cultural, Japan did NOT have the mineral wealth or quality that Western Europeans had, but there were cultural issues related to the Orient), so they never actually got to the quality of gear that Europeans enjoyed and the Europeans still emphasized agility, but with less need to dodge every blow. Even then, recorded duels with between Samurai and Portuguese in the Sengoku and early Edo periods tend to record a clear superiority in duels by the Portuguese using both an agility based fencing style and similar heavy clothing for "armor". In fact, it has been noted that Miyamoto Musashi lived in a time and place where he could have trivially observed or come in contact with European rapier & dagger fighting, which some consider might have inspired his two sword style. Personally, I wouldn't run a post gunpowder or Oriental game of any sort without a parry or dodge capability using d100. Pendragon looks like a lot of fun, but it is a rather simple game trying to recreate (somewhat) the life & times of King Arthur from a romantic point of view from 1000 or so years after his possible lifetime. Many of the issues I asked questions about above are all part of the tradition classic Arthurian fantasies and as someone pointed out, they were issues from many centuries later. Heh, the "Norman chainmail" listed as armor for the game dates several hundred years *after* the game's set time line, which is set a century after the classic period for King Arthur.... So, the idea of giving and receiving might blows protected only by one's stout set of armor fits right in...ignoring what we do know about systems of martial arts to fight that including deflecting, parrying and avoiding (dodging) incoming blows. Fantasy for fun instead of reality. It also makes for simpler combat resolution...

Okay, sorry for the rant again. Thanks for the various answers. This does look like something useful for what I want it for, which is a quick break and/or not having to deal with occasional last minute changes in available players in our small group. If someone misses, then so what, the rest go on the annual adventure and everyone can do the winter phase(s) as needed.

Thanks for the replies and the link to the bundles was nice. Solved the economic issue quite smartly. Preliminary review: Ugh. The freebie "quick start" rules worked out real well for me and sparked my interest. (Book of Knights, NOT Book of Knights & Ladies & Pendragon Campaign, NOT Great Pendragon Campaign). There was a clean character creation, although for several reasons it was obviously a bit skimpy, from looking at the full rules, it appears that it was a character creation that would be perfectly usable with the main rules. Then, there was the 5.2....You know, did someone else write/edit the Book of Knights? Seriously. Oh, severely limited scope of character creation too, seriously limited. Usually the "quick start" version is the extremely limited version, not the "core rulebook" version, right? But wait! I can use the Book of Knights & Ladies to expand on the character creation process. (whistles a jaunty tune and dives into the book).....(skims).....(goes back for a closer read)....(skims).....(switches back and forth among pages, notes that virtually all of this dreck is useful AFTER the character is created, but not BEFORE).....(skims)....(figures out halfway through the "local character" creation system there is No Fething Way a character creation process can be filleted out of the mess by printing some of the pages)....(skims further to see if there is anything at all worth it)...(discovers that the character creation system starts about halfway through the section, with more useful but worthless for initial character creation verbiage, but not so bad as almost the ENTIRE first half of the section on character creation) Again, UGH! I'm sorry, this is a work in serious need of editing expertise. It is interesting, appears to be (so far, after that introduction, I'm afraid to claim that it is actually) a clean and functional character creation process with plenty of lore, but I'm still not sure that there aren't critical character points buried in the mass of fluff/lore verbiage that got dumped out first (and had little to nothing to do with character creation). Heh, one flaw that struck me immediately was the sudden appearance in the various Feudal, Tribal, Urban, etc. charts and tables was that the "Knight, Vassal" used in all the other works had totally disappeared from the charts to determine your father's status. Now, it was still there in the definitions and still there for the inherited abilities and gear, but you cannot physically roll a "Knight, Vassal" anywhere in the charts. Oh, wait, useful for me that I happen to know that what Pendragon RPG calls a "Knight, Vassal" is what historical texts call a "Landed Knight" or in the words of the charts "Knight, Landed"....unfortunately, the guys I play with wouldn't have had a clue about that if they noticed, except by process of elimination. That was a mega-facepalm event for me it was so obviously stupid and bad. I'll get over it, I just had to vent when I look over something like this with all its rep (which it deserves a lot of AFAIK now) and see seriously stupid crap like this. The 5.2 rules should have either had the Quick Start version or a set of pregenerated characters should be handed out. Seriously.... No, "make up your own stuff" doesn't cut it with a mature (or what should be a mature) product. That was more for a time when the "rules" from the book were a hodgepodge of stuff that barely worked when it didn't contradict itself or was blindly inserted for game balance and never explained. 1st Edition, not 5th Edition. I see how much of a cluster that causes in games I participate in. If someone starts doing big house rules that contradict the written rules, the best thing to do is to throw away whatever part of the game system that was being "fixed to work right" and not use it for your character, because almost always it is a nerf detrimental to your character and if it is an exploit, then it will be nerfed to "balance it" (idiot, if you hadn't fethed with it, it wouldn't be "unbalanced"!), so why waste time developing it for your character.

Okay, Pendragon looks interesting, but.... 1. The system is meant to be a multigenerational type of game with you starting as a knight beginning to raise his family's fortunes over time, yes? 2. Think I have the overview of each year being a series of actions (short adventures) followed by a "winter" of maintenance. So, how many adventures or events typically are covered during the action part of the year in most campaigns? (I admit, this is sounding a bit like what I enjoy from the En Garde! rpg, not to be confused with the En Garde! tabletop skirmish game, which is a great game in itself.) What I'm looking for here, would it be a decent game playable with a 5-6 hour time slot for each year of game time? Another way, each year primarily several set piece hack n slash (tournament, skirmish/battle, slay the bad guy, etc.) events and one RPing event per "year". 3. Are tournaments as "pro sports" part of the game? Historically, this is what they were, rather violent sport with deaths being very low and having a "circuit" in many areas with poorer knights traveling from one to another to try to gain their fortune. Some even did this, "bought" land and continued it as a way to inject cash into their estates. 4. Given this kind of system, how much can it map over to some historical issues, where an English knight (or minor lord) could end up being a faithful vassal of the King, but also a major lord in France and Ireland? This caused some issues much later in the medieval period where knights were given the option at various times of remaining loyal to their King (of England) or being forced to change their liege to the King of France to maintain their much more extensive estates in France. Yes, this does lead to oddities where minor Baron Billy Bod is also Earl Billy Bod of Big Landia Overseas who could seriously challenge the King (not beat necessarily, but cost him lots of time & money) using those overseas troops and resources. 5. Heh, I can see the issue with armor and mass damage, which plays more to the romance side when actually "knights" of the period were wearing leather, chain and maybe a plate or two (but probably not) with an open faced helm (more than likely) during combat footing, but otherwise ran around with a light bit of chain or a quilted gambeson for armor. Full articulated plate? It makes my question 4 above a LOT more relevant from the historical side, if not so much the fantasy side. Heh, the trope of "knight in shining armor" is too pervasive instead of the reality of "knight in dingy and smelly leather & chain". EDIT: 6. What is with all of these "Book of the ????" I'm seeing on the online sites? Are they necessary? If not, what do they do? Dropping $50-100 on a game to fiddle with is one thing, but I could see that price tripling or quadrupling quickly if all of these "supplements" are considered required. Makes GW look like wimps in the "have to buy all these books to play the full game" mode. SIDE NOTE: All En Garde! the RPG really needs is a decent combat system. I've made a few notes & charts (based on the quick combat system from an old Dragon & the stats from En Garde!) to use the excellent higher level functions of it to create "tactical" results from the various orders each player gives for the month, but haven't gotten far with it since I'm also wanting to integrate the tabletop game (not related to each other, I just love the way that skirmish system is designed) so it can be used for the seasonal campaigns. Actually, I've just had some thoughts how BRP could usefully convert to tabletop stats..... Heh, actually, The Fantasy Trip would probably work even better if you dropped the Wizard half of the system.... Where did I put those books...

Ah, the days when 40k Chainfists were middle finger mounted..... But, as you requested

Nah, then you get an AA-12

Handguns are what you carry when you don't think you need a firearm. So, I like the shotgun idea myself. The Judge is nice enough, but too few pellets unless you buy the specialty .410 shells that cut the powder (since it is a pistol, not a shotgun) to fit in another pellet or three (depending on which size shot you pick). Of course, $.80+ per shot isn't so hot when you can get something like .357 Mag for less than $.30 a round. My favorite was the way it evades the sawed off shotgun laws. You see, it is "designed" to fire a slug round and the barrel is rifled...so since, this classes the weapon as something other than a shotgun and the sawed off laws don't apply.....

Trust me, if you want cutting power that doesn't require extra chain blade sharpening to even hope to come close, you go with gasoline! My little gasoline pole chainsaw trivially out cuts the full size electric my wife uses and we won't talk about what it does to the little electric pole chainsaw. Of course, they are all useful and the right tool for the job depending (of course!) on the job, so I have a use for all of them (as well as the full size gas powered one ), but if the job is mounting on the arm to butcher the undead, go with gas!