Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

53 Excellent

About Hzark10

  • Rank
    Senior Member


  • RPG Biography
    Champions, Runequest, BRP, Superworld, HeroQuest, CoC, Pendragon
  • Current games
    Pendragon, D&D, Call of Cthulhu
  • Location
    Ypsilanti, MI
  • Blurb
    have name in many Pendragon Products and author of new book, "Book of Sires"

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The idea of knowing the brothers is a good one. They can be introduced at a couple of points, one of which is pointed out earlier. I have used the scenario a couple of times and not used in another. It depends on what the gm and players campaigns. If the players enjoy a military themed, then this fits the bill. If they don't, you can avoid it if you want. Another aspect is if the players want to move upward in the noble ranks. Yes, there are different versions. Myself, I have taken the various ones and combined them. The Countess' age changes with the different versions so feel free
  2. But without that armor of courtesy, means the guy with 6D6 will, on the average, cause damage every successful hit. So it does matter.
  3. Agree that this appears to be a nice way. If it fits your story, by all means.
  4. That may very well be true. But, there are many stories where two knights go at it for hours on end. I see those battles being lost by being nickeled and dimed to death, rather than one lucky blow.
  5. Depends on the level I am playing. I have run at different styles/levels of play depending on the wishes of my players. In my Low Dark setting, I only give checks when players get a critical, even in skills. There is almost no magic and what there is, is not for player's hands. Timewise, I tie this into Pre-Arthur where history is still pretty much the rule. The second level is the default Pendragon rules. As the rules are written and houseruled on certain things. This setting is most familiar and can be tied to any period. The third is my high level game. The fae have a majo
  6. One last point many might not have considered. Pre-Arthur, and especially Uther, periods have women on the lower tier. Part of what made Arthur special is the elevation of women to equal, or near equal, status during his time. And once Arthur disappears, reality comes roaring back. So, there is a time and place for all thoughts. But, everyone liked Book of Feasts and what it did for the Winter Phase. That phase has progressively gotten more and more emphasis as time has come about. Almost to the point where it can take an entire evening to conduct as well. And if a gm rushes through thi
  7. It is helpful in that it helps SirLarkins and the gang know what perceptions are out there. And what people really like.
  8. I have always played the the Pagan Lustful virtue includes love of life. If you are Lustful, you are bursting with energy for life itself. You throw yourself into everything you do. It is not necessarily physical "Energetic" as that trait applies, but the mental state. Yes, the urge to be fruitful is there, but you do not try to mate with every woman seen. You are not a sexual predator. Since it is a Trait, and is paired with Chaste, many assume that since chaste means abstaining from sex, Lustful means the opposite. I have found that the Christian trait, "Chaste" does not mean no
  9. Again, the rules clearly state that each gm makes their own decision. KAP 5.2 clearly states the traditional role of women. It also, on page 52, details the Non-Traditional Woman where it clearly says, "Your campaign may have room in it for female knights..." If, you want to play a male dominated campaign where women can only get married and have babies, that is fine for your campaign. If someone else, using the same rules, wants to have an occasional woman knight, valkyrie-style, or amazon type female warrior, why should it bother anyone if it is not your campaign? Before anyone j
  10. I believe the default of KAP6 will still be the old game we are most familiar with. Each gamemaster may scale the role of women up or even down if they want. You may see exceptional women more in prominent roles in more progressive areas, expansions in what Ladies can do, and so on but if a gm doesn't want to cater to those options, they don't have to. YPMV will, in all likelihood, live on.
  11. 4th edition also had a major section on women. Both traditional and non-traditional. So Greg has had this since 1985. Why do we need women knights? Perhaps we don't/Perhaps we do. But, if/since Arthurian saga is being reinvented with a modern twist, it stands to reason this also will be examined. Heck, there is at least one story where Arthur is female. Another where man has reached the stars. Women gamers are becoming more and more popular. They can play men if they want, but they also want to play women. Rather than close the door, in which case they may create their own version, I
  12. And that is being looked at. But, there is a lot of stuff in the pipeline currently which will probably need updates to bring into 6th edition norms. So, how quickly out will be a question.
  13. How is this different from the Definitive Prince Valiant Companion?
  • Create New...