Hzark10

I think I might not be getting my point across. Either that, or you don't think it is a valid point. Let me try again. One thing I really like about RQ is the depth of nonhumans stats, cults, and such. Even a lowly trollkin can kill you. In KAP, you have the fae, and the traditional foes of fellow Cymri, Cambrian tribesmen, Cambrian knights, Cornish knights, Saxons (all of the various subgroups) and Cumbrians in addition to the various creatures. The Picts are one foe that many disregard because they are considered to be really inferior. Historically, they were not. The Romans built 2 walls to try to contain them. The first, Hadrian's Wall, held because of it being constantly manned and tribes of Cymri living there. The second, Antonine's Wall, was abandoned almost as quickly as it was built. The Picts were a constant thread to the Romans. In KAP, their religion, the 'magical' tattoos, and the game depiction of these people give us the impression of kobolds, goblins, or other mass monsters who are easily mowed down as they wear no armor. In 4th edition, the 'feint' maneuver made them quite effective. Historically, it is thought they fought with a war dog. Well, you know what happens if you are double teamed in KAP. King Lot was one of Arthur's enemies and he had Picts at his beck and call. Merlin's magic save the day there. The point I am making, is the current proposed rules weaken one of the more dominant tribes/enemies to the point where either you abandon their game text or they become less then what they should be. Your point about "the game isn't about playing non-knight Picts" should be looked at more closely. So, I can't play a Pict? how about a Cambrian Tribesman, or an Irish warrior. Saxon? Can you only play a tried and true Knight? Fine, what about those who have played through the Great Pendragon Campaign a couple of times now and what to do something different? I am looking for rules that allow campaigns to set in areas other than Salisbury. Book of Sires was meant to open the whole of Logres to a campaign. There is enough background to set it in Cumbria with a little bit of work. That way, you can have a campaign that allows one to follow GPC, but not be front and center. Gamemasters can create their own stories and can go as far afield as they wish. Some may want to play a nontraditional campaign where tribal characters are the norm in the 480's and not really get involved in the knight aspect until after the conquest phase. Where to set it? Well, the far north is a very interesting place. "Beyond the Wall" is a classic Pendragon source book that details this area. It is worth looking at for the ideas there, especially if you want to play a Pict, whether up north or in the south where Greg placed a tribe for those who wanted to play a Pict. Just like he placed a tribe of loyal Saxons, Berrocings, in case someone wanted to play a Saxon. I am NOT attacking you in this. I am simply saying I think KAP has the capacity to be more than it currently is. I may be the only person who feels this. I don't think so, but it is possible. Making DEX more important by increasing defaults for weapons and some skills to DEX/2 makes that Attribute more important. So would be making Dodge or other combat maneuvers that depend on DEX. This board is all about examining such things. Humbly submitted, BobS.

agree with Jeff. Forgot about the 2 French films, but missed the Parsifal one. I will have to watch it.

I really enjoyed, in no particular order: Black Shield of Falworth Ivanhoe Court Jester Robin Hood Camelot Some of these are not absolutely in complete agreement, but all entail someone rising above to make things better.

I want to back up Veli here. Greg specifically helped rewrite this section (Roman history/background) as he wanted to make sure it fit his version of what the Roman characters had for background. It his his note on page 270 "A Note about the Romans" regarding this. So, no matter what history says, KAP specifically uses Greg's vision as its source. And, if and when, the continental Romans are discussed as possible choices, these point(s) will be addressed. Not saying you are wrong, simply saying Greg wanted a specific result. A similar one occurred when the Aquitainians history was being written, about how to reconcile the Visogoths into Lancelot's people when their history is so well known.

I think that way is a mistake, IMHO. King Arthur is about the rise and fall of a great society where wrongs are righted, the knights follow a code of honor, the king is generous and noble, and so on. Who is this Arthur? If you study history, there are quite a few who could qualify as being Arthur. For better or worse, Greg decided to set his Arthur in Salisbury and that made him a Cymric. It follows that means the Cymri. Now putting this into gaming terms, how can we define the various cultures? KAP has only one race - human (except for the fae, but you can run the game without them as well). So how to differentiate? Stereotypes were created for each culture. Basic Role Playing (BRP) is the core of KAP and all of the Chaosium games to a greater or lesser extent. So, try to figure out the different cultures (Cymri, Irish, Cornish, Aquitannian, Britonnian, Roman, Pict, Cambrian, Cumbrian) by using the tools provided. These are good points everyone is bringing up as it makes the powers that be look at the system and try to decide what, if any, needs to be changed. We know, based on notifications, Book of Castles, Book of Magic are pretty well done, there is a Samurai type game, a Greek based game, and maybe a couple of other things out almost ready. So, the system works, I think. How to improve it? DEX for knights in their heavy armor may not be a great stat because it is overshadowed by Encumbrance. However, for a Pict, who wears little armor, that DEX can come into play. Moving inside castles, court scenes, normal day activities where armor is not worn, and again you have DEX being used. APP follows a similar route, although there are very few uses for it during combat. But, human nature tends to make one turn towards someone who is more good looking than not. I believe we need to keep these skills. Tweak the system more to make them more important rather than the opposite. Do the skills matter? If so, what level do they start? Are they realistic? How do you differentiate between starting levels based on culture? These are good questions. And, I am sure the powers that be are listening. Humbly submitted, BobS.

😀That is one great thing about this game, it fits into almost any mode of gameplay you like.

Ah, you are talking about the Meta-Skills? yes/no? I, and I will admit I might very well be in the minority, like them. If you are creating characters, and using the Random method, you might very well end up with being a Roman during Uther's time where fighting those big Saxons are the yearly events. Yes, they give each culture a unique design. Yes, they will be superior in their own element, but try to act like a thief in D&D say, and have no levels in the actual class and see what happens. Better to have the players tell you what they want and go from there so they won't be of a culture that they don't want to play. But, that being said, I had a monk who could cast clerical spells without a level in cleric (background and feat choices). Yes, I was a terrible healer, but I COULD heal. In KAP, not being a Roman means I might not be as good in intrigue as that Roman fellow over there, but that doesn't mean I can't try. Humbly submitted.

Bad example as I am probably the leading BoB contrarian in these boards. (My battles are already complicated enough, thanks for asking; I don't need a book's worth of extra rules to memorise.) Sorry, my bad. I somehow thought you were on the other side with all your discussion on it. Will have to go back and reread the posts. I feel BoB has a place, but where is my question.

I think this has been very interesting take on things. Tenchi21, if I understand your take, if it the distinctive features of attributes themselves that give a gm the power to make modifiers based on the situation. I consider myself an "old-timer" being with this system in full since 4th edition and a dabbler since 1st. It has changed over the years. Combat, being very important, has the most rules and if/when there is another edition, more changes will occur, I expect. Courtly skills have been slower to develop, although this is open to debate as well. The various editions of Pendragon has slowly gone backward in time. 4th edition sets the base starting point at 530 with the background for fathers/grandfathers reaching back to 490. Boy King supplement moved the overall time back to 510. 5th edition moved it further back to the middle of Uther. Finally, when the GPC came out, the time was firmly set to 485. The Book of Uther and its addemdum, moved the starting date to 480. This is the time of dark times, the dark ages, so to speak. Combat is all powerful, court scenes and the kindler notions of fine amor are not really considered. And the Book of Sires compiles backgrounds starting in 439 all the way to 510 for a campaign set in Logres. That has/is changing. The system needs to move forward in time now. Courtly skills will have greater weight. Atxtgx was correct in what he stated when he gave modifiers. They were mostly combat related as the system has spent the most time upon that aspect. Upon rereading your take a couple of times now, I think you reached valid points yourself. It is not the way I would have handled it, but I always refer back to YPMV (Your Pendragon May Vary). I allow Traits and Passion to have more power than others, while you may not. Veli may use the Book of Battle in its entirely, while I may only use it for the important scripted battles, Atgxtg may be full blown into the Courtly aspect and family events, while I gloss over all things that are not pertinent to the core campaign, and finally, you may use Distinctive Features as a way to give modifiers to situations. The number of people I have actually met that are on these boards I can count on one hand. However, I now know by these boards, over 100. I have been involved in rpgs since 1976, and been in print since 1978. I know, and have been involved in, numerous systems as an co-author, game system developer, system analyst, go-to guy, and have successfully run campaigns that had a 10+ year span. I do NOT consider myself an expert, as I always look for ways to improve my style of playing/gming, or systems to make them more fun. Your treatment here is novel. Not that way most of us do it. I don't expect my take to be the one and only way to do things. For example, I allow a successful Passion roll to affect another Passion, Trait, Skill, or even Attribute. (Successful Love (child) allowing one to double STR so can pick up (move) that car to get to your child). But that is me. I don't assume or force my way onto others. Not saying you are either, or anyone else is. I also say up front this is my take on the rules, or the way I handle things. Believe me when I say, I have had "what the..." moments when others have posted something, and probably they have with mine. BUT, I never take it personally as I try to see why they say what they say. I learn from everyone and hope that I make it a better game. If you show yourself to be a regular on these boards, some familiarity is automatically assumed. Humbly submitted, BobS.

Not trying to jump into the middle here, but if your campaign varies from another campaign, the rule: YPMV has come into play. These little tidbits are where one gm differs than another. There is nothing wrong with it per se, but most gm's would say that if you are using a rule, and they are not, it is a house rule. Your comments are a perfect example of this. However, these need to be noted so any new players are aware of them and prevent them from being blindsided. I use my own set of exceptions and additions to the standard ruleset. Morien has his, and so on. We should be aware of them and HOW they affect the game. Do they help create an unfair advantage or change the rules to a great exent? Do they simply add color? Nothing wrong, but it should be noted.

I agree.

Well, I plan on getting one, even if it is a draft copy. Will help in the creation of a campaign I am thinking of.

Yeah, oops. I think we missed this one. My notes indicate it also probably should be either a mixture. The continent should have more Roman Christians than British Christians, especially if one argues these tables start in 439, before the Second Migration. So, yes, this should be C/Mix (BC or RC). BobS.

Remember that Book of Sires starts circa 439 AD. Cheshire is defined as part of the the area that will be part of the Kingdom of Norgales. This kingdom does not yet exist when the Book starts. If you prefer them to be C/BC from the beginning, I would see no problem in defining it as such. Part of the history here is when Cunneida comes south, Norgales eventually becomes a kingdom and is eventually converted to BC from Paganism. I think it would depend on what David L. says regarding whether it is in error or not.

Agree here. This also takes care of any problems for cultures without squiredom. They just start at 14 and go from there. Agree with minor customization.

Every system has its faults, at least to some. The idea behind using stats as baseline defaults would be to make them more valuable and not be see as a dump event. To some, the idea of losing DEX leading to losing skill level, is not based in real life. For those of us who are above middle-age, just try to do the stuff we did when we were much younger. I can't benchpress what I used to, do all the acrobatic maneuvers, and so on. So, at least to me, making skills stat-based makes sense and if you lose stats, those skills suffer. Trying to fit each skill into a base stat is more problematical as KAP does not have an Intelligence based stat. So, this is where I see problems lie. Just my two denarii.

Book of Sires tries to cover the nuts and bolts of the history that Greg preferred. You will notice there is lots of room for the Fae, high level romance and quests, and the dirty, nitty fighting if that is your cup of tea. So, I find that Pendragon can very well fit each of the three styles you postulate. I have played in all three types of campaigns. I liked parts of each. They were memorable.

There are online games of KAP out there. Most are full. But, if you wanted to start one, just mention it, what your expectations are, and I am sure you will find players.

I ran a successful 3rd age campaign Middle-Earth campaign, but I set it in the Northern Kingdom. That way, no matter what the characters did, the Witch-King won in the end. But it was fun while it lasted. I will admit, it was a non-Pendragon campaign. And if I did it again, I would use Pendragon. I find the traits and passions so much more enjoyable.

Another question somewhat related. How would you handle if the Assistant Shaman wanted to start a Spirit Cult with Idrema? Would he have to wait until he was a full shaman?

I am curious: Has there been a case where a King has reassigned manors belonging to different holders that are geographically separate and make them more adjacent to each other? What would be the precedent? What would the repercussions?

I second the first part. For the latter half, it depends on what you like. Personally, I like having the actual paper copy. So that would mean buying the pdf and then printing it (paper and ink costs) or buy the book where you can. Welcome, btw. Hope you find everything you need. Be aware, some/most of us have opinions one way or another, but we all agree that Pendragon is a great game. If you want to concentrate on quests, then you might want to look at the Classic Pendragon section at "Tales of Chivalry and Romance" or "Tales of Magic and Miracles" to see how you can create your own adventures. The best advice I can give you is, Your Pendragon May Vary. Choose what works for you and just have fun.

Glad to hear of it.

Definitely keep me posted on your campaign. Want to see how Book of Sires works as a GPC style campaign, albeit it is missing all court activities, rumors, and scenarios. It does have the year-by-year description of what happens.

my wording caused confusion here. I meant, take a directed trait, such as Suspicious (Uther) that could/would work against your Passion. The gm could ask you to make a suspicious roll when Uther does something. This could set up the situation where you are forced to roll against your Loyalty. does this make more sense?