Jump to content

New edition of Pendragon & naming conventions


Recommended Posts

Other possible leads for a more "historical" approach are Mythic Britain for Mythras (of course) and the french Keltia, which, despite its name, is a game about Arthurian myths, based on Welsh sources. I remember the campaign was horribly railroaded :

-Arthur goes somewhere, and the players follow him,
-The players can do some unimportant things,
-Arthur do something to make the plot advance,
-Repeat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Hzark10 said:

To say no, simply because you don't like the way the naming conventions are, would be similar to me not doing Middle Earth, because I didn't like the way they portrayed Saruman.

 

This is part of the point. The myth also very likely has a historical basis in a reality, without which there wouldn’t be the later medieval writings. It’s not Middle Earth. It comes from Brythonic Briton, and the struggle against the Anglo Saxon invaders.

We can all play the game how we want to, and I’m not trying force everyone into playing an historically correct dark age Briton game. But I am proposing that there is a degree of sensitivity given to the historical origins of the subject through giving options in the new edition to use the old Welsh/Brythoinc names. 
This could be notes in the back of the book. Love to see two versions of the map of Prydain for instance. One with the familiar Pendragon naming conventions, and the other a truer representation of the Cymric.

To not do anything to acknowledge the Welsh/Brythoinc origins of the myths and the significance of the language in the story would be amiss in these enlightened times. Particularly when you have the living breathing descendant language of Arthur to enrich your game. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mugen said:

Other possible leads for a more "historical" approach are Mythic Britain for Mythras (of course) and the french Keltia, which, despite its name, is a game about Arthurian myths, based on Welsh sources. I remember the campaign was horribly railroaded :

Keltia was awful, the whole premise was basically "look, we're not like Pendragon here, we give you REALISTIC arthurian stuff, brythonic stuff wooo hoo!!!"

Came across as pretentious and stupid. No wonder that game bombed so hard. And I bought it on release, because I like the idea of a more "grounded" arthurian game. But the execution was poor. And I sold that book a few years later

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Greyblade said:

Keltia was awful, the whole premise was basically "look, we're not like Pendragon here, we give you REALISTIC arthurian stuff, brythonic stuff wooo hoo!!!"

Came across as pretentious and stupid. No wonder that game bombed so hard. And I bought it on release, because I like the idea of a more "grounded" arthurian game. But the execution was poor. And I sold that book a few years later

Well, they tried very hard to reproduce the success of Qin, but with far less talented people...

French edition had 4 supplements, though, but I think 6 were initially planed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, mandrill_one said:

You mean, a bit like this document by Scruffygrognard? 🙂

Pretty close, props for digging it up. :)

I would prefer a different ordering, though, with the modern name first since that is what most of the KAP books are using. That way, I can easily find its Roman or Briton equivalent, whereas now I pretty much have to scan everything in search for the name (or, since I prefer to cheat, use Find "name"). :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Paid a bod yn dwp said:

To not do anything to acknowledge the Welsh/Brythoinc origins of the myths and the significance of the language in the story would be amiss in these enlightened times. Particularly when you have the living breathing descendant language of Arthur to enrich your game. 

There is very much an acknowledgement of the Welsh roots. Arthur's people are the Cymri. Arthur himself is a Cymri, too. Most of the PKs will be Cymric and have Cymric names, as do most of the NPCs they interact with. It is only when you get up to the RTK and other famous people when you start getting names from literature. While you could turn some of those names back to their Celtic roots, there are many, such as Lancelot, who do not have a Celtic counterpart as he was made up later. Same is true for many other RTKs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Morien said:

Such as Lancelot, who do not have a Celtic counterpart as he was made up later.

It is a bold statement, Morien ;) Lancelot have probably celtic roots. There is the german Lanzelet for example, which is very interesting to study in that regard. All his childhood with the Lady of the Lake sounds very celtic to me, for example. To be honest, many adventures of Lancelot in his first novel have a celtic feeling.

However, Lancelot was probably not associated with Arthur before Chrétien de Troyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Morien said:

Yeah, the default KAP is explicitly anachronistic, and the society is clearly medieval rather than Dark Ages. That doesn't mean that it can't be used to a Dark Ages campaign, as said by:

It would take some tweaking, but it would be possible to reimagine most of it, as in above.

Yup. In fact, that touches upon mydesire for one or more books that give us variant versions of the tale. Amore Celtic Arthur, a more Roman one, etc. 

9 hours ago, Morien said:

 

One would probably have to do away with tournaments, though, by and large, and landholdings would probably be family clan holdings rather than individual ones.

Not necessarily. Khanwulf pointed out the Roman Hippika Gymnasia, a series of military exercises and games conducted by Roman Calvary that could eithe rrepace tournamnets, or morph into them. I used the Hippika a couple of times in the "prequel" peroid of my current campaign. 

 

9 hours ago, Morien said:

It still wouldn't be historical (well, Arthur himself probably wasn't historical, either).

I think he was historical, , but the historical Arthur probably bore little resemblance to the legendary one. THe legendary one is also a combination of several late Roman/Post Roman leaders such as Aetius and Riothamus.

9 hours ago, Morien said:

If one wants to do that, then one would pretty much have small kingdoms with a couple of hundred spearmen struggling against one another, rather than tens of thousands of soldiers and thousands of heavily armored cavalry (knights). That being said, I know that some people have at least planned on running Bernard Cornwell's The Warlord Chronicles using KAP.

Yes it's certianly possible. The underlying core rules set to Pendragon is still RQ/BRP and is flexible enough to work for just about any setting. Pendragon has a few wrinkles that make it favor knights a bit more, but you can still do just about any setting with the rules with a bit of tweaking.

9 hours ago, Morien said:

I admit, I have not even read Age of Arthur, so I don't know how full a world they give, and if it would be easy to just grab that world and use KAP to run it. I don't think it should be too difficult; the setting is usually quite separate from the rule mechanics. Especially if one drops out most fantastical elements like magic and monsters, which would not have a place in a more historical campaign anyway.

I have it, and it's nice. There are some choices they mde with it that I'm not fond of (Vortigern as Uther's brother) and I am not as fond of the Fate game mechanics as I am of PEndragon, but it is a nice Arthrian RPG. GURPS Camelot was't bad either. There are probably at least a half dozen Arthurian RPGs out there. 

 

9 hours ago, Morien said:

You are correct about that as far as the GPC is concerned, but the 'Dark Ages' in GPC is strictly visual: clothing styles and such. The society in KAP 5.2 is medieval, and BoUther (and Warlord before it) makes it even more plain by lifting the society and the laws pretty much straight from the Norman England. With a nod towards British Christianity (which I don't think should be a thing, but that is another discussion).

 

Not entirely. The big differences are in both culture and religion. In Medieval Britian all the Knights would be Roman Christian, at least until Henry VII split form Rome and started the Church of England. All those Pagans and "Cymric Christians" (i.e. more pagans and heretics) would be rooted out as heretics.  I think the BoU probably is a little too medieval, considering how widespread other religions and cultures are in Pendragon Britain. 

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Mugen said:

Yes, and German speakers would certainly say how annoying it is Pendragon doesn't consider the grail as emerald stone fallen from Lucifer's head, and makes no mention of Lohengrin, son of Parsifal.

Yup. That's exactly the problem. Each country and region has versions of the tale that make Arthur out to be a local hero. IS he from Logres, Cornwall, Northumbria, Britanny, or elsewhere. No matter which version we pick, there will be someone, somewhere who will wish we pick their version.

I ran into some of that myself with the Book of Sires. Sometimes  I would have liked to gone in a different direction that Sires  did with some events and people, and no doubt would have done so if I had written it. But if I had, there would be people wishing that I had gone in a different direction. Ultimately, each GM gets to decide things in their campaign. I've changed a couple of things here and there- some by design and others by accident, but it's still recognizably Pendragon. 

10 hours ago, Mugen said:

Note that this "Arthur" candidate (Lucius Artorius Castus) is considered to have lived in the 3rd century, and certainly never faced a Saxon invasion. It's even possible that he never went to Armoric, but in Armenia instead.

Yeah tracking down Arthur is really difficult, It's probably that Arthur is probably a title or nickname rather than his actual birth name,

 

 

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Percarde said:

Like what Hollywood, or the movie / TV, industry does.  You know like they changed history with Braveheart, Pearl Harbor, The White Queen and pretty much everything that has been made in the last 40 years....

Somewhat. I think some of the changes with Arthurian lore were more natural and occurred as the story was unintentionally altered and updated when retold over the ages to people in different times and places. Hollywood's changes tend to be more deliberate or out of ignorance about the story they are supposedly retelling, or even to simplify a complex story to make it more easily understood.. But I'm sure a lot of the changes to Arthurian lore over the years were deliberate too, so probably not too much different than today.

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/5/2020 at 4:21 PM, Percarde said:

Like what Hollywood, or the movie / TV, industry does.  You know like they changed history with Braveheart, Pearl Harbor, The White Queen and pretty much everything that has been made in the last 40 years....

 

20 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

Somewhat. I think some of the changes with Arthurian lore were more natural and occurred as the story was unintentionally altered and updated when retold over the ages to people in different times and places. Hollywood's changes tend to be more deliberate or out of ignorance about the story they are supposedly retelling, or even to simplify a complex story to make it more easily understood.. But I'm sure a lot of the changes to Arthurian lore over the years were deliberate too, so probably not too much different than today.

The needs of story are completely different than the needs of history. 

Anyone who thinks Hollywood only started changing history in the last 40 years hasn't paid attention Hollywood's storytelling in the past 100 years. And if we go further back, we find history altering criminals like Dumas, Shakespeare, and Homer.

Storytellers always take the grist of history and shape it to their own needs. That's what the storytellers of Arthurian legend did, looking back at a incidents we (and they) had no true record of, creating myths that they needed to shape for their own needs.

Ultimately King Arthur Pendragon is not about history. Is is about legend and myth. As noted in every edition of the game, Le Morte D'Arthur is the primary telling of the tale used for the game's inspiration. This means the game, following Malory's book, is looking backward with a nostalgic gazing to a time that never existed. This idea -- a lost time of something great -- is tied deeply into this particular telling of the tale.

I understand that a lot of people want a more historical version of KAP with a lot more historical details. Greg certainly did! He kept working on more and more books to provide a historical grounding. But I also think this can become a trap -- since Arthurian legends in general, and KAP in particular -- are not history. The are myth and legend. "Whose myth and legend?" seems to be what this thread is about. I can only suggest that the answer to the question is as rich as the number of people who want to play a game of Arthurian legend. 

But I also think expecting one game book to support all versions of Arthurian legend is going to be too much for a single RPG. One of the things I have always loved and admired about KAP in the 1st, 3rd, and 5th editions, is that it knew what it wanted to be, and did exactly that thing very well.

Edited by creativehum
  • Like 3

"But Pendragon isn’t intended to be historical, just fun.
So have fun."

-- Greg Stafford

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

GURPS Camelot was't bad either.

No, but to paraphrase creativehum's words, packing three different versions of Arthur into one 128 page book was a bit too much. I can understand why they did it, but it felt very much like being handed the summary and told to go and do more research on my own.

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

The big differences are in both culture and religion.

Logres is almost totally Christian, and that is where most of the PKs are from, as are most of the NPKs. Besides, Greg deliberately steered away from religion as a source of conflict, so while I agree that those Pagans would have very hot time in actual Middle Ages, the society and the culture is still very much a Christian Medieval one. If a Pagan lady sleeps around, she still loses Honor and so forth for adultery, etc. Anyway. Not really a topic of this thread, merely pointing out that Uther Period is clearly not Migratory Era Britain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, creativehum said:

The needs of story are completely different than the needs of history. 

Not really. The "needs of history" are basically the need of story. Cultures that adapted and altered the Arthruian legends to make them more accessible to their audience or to promote a s[efic agenda (both Lancelot and Galahad were added for specfic reasons) are doing the 

Quote

Anyone who thinks Hollywood only started chaining history in the last 40 years hasn't paid attention Hollywood's storytelling in the past 100 years. And if we go further back, we find

All storytelling alters things in someway to fit the goals of the story, even if is is just to provide a structure. Reality isn't tighly plotted with easy to follow stroeis that resolve themselves up neatly. 

 

Quote

history altering criminals like Dumas, Shakespeare, and Homer.

Criminals? I think you are being unfair. Neither Dumas nor Shakespeare claimed to be historians, or to be telling a ture histroy. They were storytellers. As for Homer, he probably didn't exist but instead was a pen name the stories were attributed to at a later date.

They are not like, say Geoffrey of Monmouth who passed his writing off as some sort of history, or how a lot of so called historians were mostly writing propaganda. 

 

Quote

Storytellers always take the grist of history and shape it to their own needs. That's what the storytellers of Arthurian legend did, looking back at a incidents we (and they) had no true record of, creating myths that they needed to shape for their own needs, from the grist of history.

Yup.

Quote

Ultimately King Arthur Pendragon is not about history. Is is about legend and myth. As noted in every edition of the game, Le Morte D'Arthur is the primary telling of the tale used for the game's inspiration. This means the game, following Malory's book, is looking backward with a nostalgic gaze to a time that never existed. This idea -- a lost time of something great -- is tied deeply into this particular telling of the tale.

Exactly. Arthur's Camelot is the golden age that never was. 

Quote

I understand that a lot of people want a more historical version of KAP with a lot more historical details. Greg certainly did! He kept working on more and more books to provide a historical grounding. But I also think this can become a trap -- since Arthurian legends in general, and KAP in particular -- are not history.

I don't think that people are necessarily a more historical version of Arthur, but instead one that is closer to the version they prefer. The thing about the King Arthur legend is that there are lots of variations on it, and different bits and not one cohenet narritaive. That's why even things like how Arthur get's  Excalibur has multiple versions (is it the sword in the stone or given to him by the Lady of the Lake?), and how things have been changed in the game over the years.  

I think that is a natural desire too, as the legend King Arthur continues to evolve over time in order to remain relevant. That's why T.H. White's Arthur is  more social worker and  less monarch than Malory's Arthur. 

 

Quote

The are myth and legend. "Whose myth and legend?" seems to be what this thread is about. I can only suggest that the answer to the question is as rich as the number of people who want to play a game of Arthurian legend. 

Richer, as there are no doubt people who are interested in Arthurian Lore who have no interest in playing Pendragon. 

 

Quote

But I also think expecting one game book to support all versions of Arthurian legend is going to be too much for a single RPG.

I agree. But I also think that Pendragon is solid enough to cover some of the variants in supplements. 

Quote

 

One of the things I have always loved and admired about KAP in the 1st, 3rd, and 5th editions, is that it knew what it wanted to be, and did exactly that thing very well.

I disagree somewhat with you here. If they game knew what it wanted to be then it would have been that in KAP1 and never changed. Pendragon has changed with editions. KAP1 was more vague and open ended, but over the years, it has become more defined and tied closer to Malory. One example of that is Camelot. In KAP 1 it was Cadbury Castle, a site that was recently suggest (by Ashe) as a possibility for a historical Arthur. In KAP3, Greg switched it to Winchester, and stated to phase out the use of Celtic and Roman place names for those used in Malory. Another is how the sword in the stone was merged with Excalibur in the GPC.

Edited by Atgxtg
  • Like 1

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Morien said:

No, but to paraphrase creativehum's words, packing three different versions of Arthur into one 128 page book was a bit too much. I can understand why they did it, but it felt very much like being handed the summary and told to go and do more research on my own.

That's sort of the case with most GURPS setting books. The same holds true for the Rolemaster setting books, or even KAP1. I don't think that's a bad thing either. Frankly, any GM who wants to go off down a rabbit hole for a non-standard version of a story should go and do more research. THe nice thing about Pendragon and the GPC is that a GM doesn't need to do any research to run it. They still should read Malory, or at least Pyle or some other streamlined rendition of the "standard" version of the tale, but they don't have to. Someone who wants to run a Roman Arthur or a strictly Cyric one is going to have to do their homework. 

BTW, I don't think the current trend of huge gamebooks is any better. Bigger books make it harder to find something when you need to. One thing I like about Pendragon is that the supplementary rules are somewhat modular in nature. No one actually needs to use any of the supplements to play the game. Yes, they can expand upon and enhance the game, but none of them are vital to the game, not even the GPC.

37 minutes ago, Morien said:

Logres is almost totally Christian, and that is where most of the PKs are from, as are most of the NPKs. Besides, Greg deliberately steered away from religion as a source of conflict, so while I agree that those Pagans would have very hot time in actual Middle Ages, the society and the culture is still very much a Christian Medieval one.

 

If a Pagan lady sleeps around, she still loses Honor and so forth for adultery, etc.

Does she? Yes she does in the recent KAP supplments, but that doesn't really mesh with what came before. Much like how several character's religion has changed between editions. 

37 minutes ago, Morien said:

 

Anyway. Not really a topic of this thread, merely pointing out that Uther Period is clearly not Migratory Era Britain.

No, it not migratory Era Britain, but it not really Medieval Britain either. Its a mythical age that doesn't quite mesh with reality, and that's sort of the point. If people wanted Medeival Brtitian they could find a game that covered that. Pendragon is Arthurian Britain, which is half real and half legend.

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Atgxtg said:

Criminals? I think you are being unfair. Neither Dumas nor Shakespeare claimed to be historians, or to be telling a ture histroy.

I think you're missing the commentary I'm making on people faulting storytellers for not being historically accurate. 

All in all, I don't think your post did anything other than pretty much agree with the points I made in my post. For that I thank you!

"But Pendragon isn’t intended to be historical, just fun.
So have fun."

-- Greg Stafford

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, creativehum said:

The needs of story are completely different than the needs of history. 

Anyone who thinks Hollywood only started chaining history in the last 40 years hasn't paid attention Hollywood's storytelling in the past 100 years. And if we go further back, we find history altering criminals like Dumas......

That was kinda my point.  Except I was assuming most forum dwellers were less than 40 - 50.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, creativehum said:

I think you're missing the commentary I'm making on people faulting storytellers for not being historically accurate. 

Perhaps? Inflection and intent are not always easy to pick up on in text.

19 hours ago, creativehum said:

All in all, I don't think your post did anything other than pretty much agree with the points I made in my post. For that I thank you!

You're welcome.

Chaos stalks my world, but she's a big girl and can take of herself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re the original question, I'm for both modern place names and older ones where relevant.  I don't really care which comes first, as long as both are there.  The modern place names just make it easier to locate place on a map and are more intuitive in terms of my mental understanding of geography. I absolutely hate having to look through the appendices of BoEstate, BoWarlord etc to figure out the modern name of some location so that I can figure out where it is.  

If I were writing the game, I'd base the core rule book and most other stuff off of Malory, which is familiar to most people.  However, I would certainly buy supplements that allowed conversion to a more historical dark ages or to a more mythological Celtic/Welsh interpretation of the setting.  I think the game mechanics certainly allow it.  I would love gaming in a more Mabinogian-ish setting.   

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...