Hzark10

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.

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 would rather see rules set forth that allow them to exist in the world of Arthurian lore I am familiar with. Expansion of women in traditional roles has also occurred and the court/winter phase has expanded as a result. In upcoming expansions, women have vital/prominent roles. So, some of us will play the traditional male dominated games while others will play with a somewhat more modern look. We are all playing fantasy. After all, there is only ONE Arthur, right? Please, will the real King Arthur stand up.

I would be interested

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.

6th will be backwards compatible.

How is this different from the Definitive Prince Valiant Companion?

I am thinking it will be more welcoming for women players, and the role of Ladies themselves will be expanded at some point. Either in the core or an expansion. But if gm's and players are happy now with their campaigns, I don't think it will negate those.

YPMV will always have its place. Can't say for certain, but women did go to war. Certain cultures had women that would fight as well as the men. But, most games will keep to the standard of what has been played, I would think. For example, a campaign along the style of Foster's Prince Valiant would be different than one patterned after Ivanhoe, different than Beowolf and so on. Each gamemaster will make that decision, I would think.

Not sure what you mean on she-knight. The fact that any of the Pregens could be a woman, or that they didn't declare one or more to be a woman?

Oops, thanks for catching my mistake. Yes, it is the Fens (Logres) and not Moors (Cornwall). Knew that. But brain sometimes switches things.

I agree in principal. However, Val was not a cymric knight to begin with. Rather he was a Thulian prince who fled to the Moors when their homeland was taken. He was not brought up in a strict knightly heritage, so does not think like a normal KAP character would. Yet, he did eventually get knighted. The games are not mirror images of each other. You can do things in PV without the strictures of a knightly and honor bound society. It is possible to import the game over to KAP, but their are changes that need to be made, mostly in the understanding of the characters themselves. I enjoy both games.

One of the major themes of Arthurian lore is the lack of Arthur and Guenever having children. Arthur does have other children as has been pointed out. If one wants to have them have children, it will have major ramifications, IMHO. From the reason why they don't/can't to now there being an official heir will now affect your campaign. Perhaps the reason why they suddenly do needs to be carefully examined. Does this mean Guenever's affair with Lancelot never happens? Does Modred fail in the civil war? Does Camlann never happen? And if you go into the religious side of things, Arthur does not fail his kingly duties, he does provide an heir! What caused this? Was Guenever barren? If so, how? What cured her? You have lots of possibilities to pursue along this course and if could be an interesting campaign.

Thanks for the clarification! Greg was more than just KAP. White Bear and Red Moon, Runequest, Wyrm's Footnotes, and the beginning of Chaosium all had his hands on them as well. Looking forward to the announcements.

No, not a typo. I believe something is being announced every day for the next few days.

I do use both books. But, to be honest, I never run a battle on the fly, even cutting a night short if the players stumble into one. I then play it out and introduce those points where the PKs can help their side. It helps me with the narrative of it as well as building the entire drama out. A battle tells a story and I want the players to feel they are important parts of it, even if they are going to lose big time. How did they affect the story? How are they going to be view after the battle by both sides. "Yeah we crushed you all. Running like scared rabbits you were, all except that little pocket over there..."

This is how I have handled it in the past. A couple of things to keep in mind. It stipulates "the peasants are unwilling fighters. As soon as one or more are brought to zero in combat, the rest will flee in terror..." (bold emphasis mine) If you think how one or more can be brought to zero and they flee after 5 or more coins are lost in combat in any event, please review the rules of "Persona Combat with Multiple Combatants" on page 27. You have 10, they have 12. Ok, but split it up. You put 4 on A, 3 on B and 3 on C. Each of them has 4. So, it is 4 on 4, 3 on 4 and 3 on 4. If odds are correct, you should will probably have one or more losses. How can I win? Remember, the bolded words above? Instead of being totally fair, put 6 on A, 2 on B and 2 on C. Now, you should win against at least one peasant. YOU win when one person is brought to zero, or they take 5 or more coin losses. In other words, if you are fighting 3 peasants, reducing the group to 5 losses is one way to win, but the other is reducing one to zero. Yes, you will take some damage, but you need to lose 10 times to their 4. Much easier. Does this help?

I would look at google to see if any used books are out there for sale. Of course, you might be paying $50 or more...

Since this was the first virtual Con for many of us, interested in hearing everyone's thoughts, comments, stories, and such. Interested in knowing how many out of country people attended as well. I will assume Chaosium will end up doing a survey, but this forum allows possibly more comments and personal stories.

Understand. However, I might be something of the completist, as I do try to pick up everything for a couple of reasons: 1) They might never see the light of day again, so missing out on whatever is not reprinted. 2) In the scenarios, the might change a few things and seeing an older version also gives me a chance to vary what the current version has (for those players who read everything and try to use that knowledge)

OOPs! Tizan Thane, you are correct, it is Morgan le Fay. I need to get new glasses. That 8 pt. font is getting harder to read. Thanks for catching that. If you want to see Greg's thoughts, this bibliography is a gem. Just not sure 3 pages and the timelines are worth enough to get the book as most of the book has been printed in later products. That being said, I would pick it up as it shows the progression of how to flesh out scenarios (compare this print to one later), Greg's thoughts at the time, and a few other details not discussed yet.

Yup, and Yup. I'm not sure what your point is with that though. It was an attempted answer to what Mugen had posted as shown below:

The Pendragon Campaign is 75 pages and The Great Pendragon Campaign is 429 pages. The gamemaster character file was probably created as a separate file due to size/cost of the GPC if added to it. If one is familiar with the latter, then a great amount of the former is in there, rewritten a bit and expanded. It is true that a timeline is added for certain characters, but this is done for only the four most important characters: Arthur, Guenever, Lancelot and Modred. The key difference I think is the pace of the campaign. The entire campaign according to GPC is about two years, if played weekly. In the PC, it is accelerated where it is suggested to run 6 years in the same session. The part I like the most is the extensive Bibliography section where Greg talks about each book he lists rather than just the list. For example, in Marion Bradley Zimmer's Mist of Avalon, he notes that Gueneviere is the least likeable version he has encountered, but is his favorite interpretation of Modred. Just my humble opinion, and remember YPMV.

It does have a synopsis of the events, major characters. It does have a shortened campaign that can be run in a reasonable time frame and I believe was the beginnings of the GPC which did see print later.

One can always get Glory for success with a skill. In Paladin, Romance is a skill. Every year the knight is courting the lady, he must give her a gift worth at least 1 L. and succeed in Romance. You can get 10 glory for this, 20 for a critical. But, no, there is no additional glory for succeeding in each task directly. The gamemaster is always free to give glory based on what the task is. Cheers, BobS.

Page 191 under Romantic Knight.