Stay tuned in the coming days for a major announcement about the King Arthur Pendragon RPG

[redmoongoddess]

Anyways, I listened to the podcast posted earlier, and I felt like writing a run down of announcements made regarding new books there. Note that there's also a lot of interesting things announced about the new edition in general that I've not mentioned here, as I'm away from my computer atm and can't access my full notes. I'll do another post about those things later. (Some interesting changes! Like that your spouse dying can cause you to suffer from grief!)

-Kickstarter for 1st edition Pendragon classic reprint coming soon, may include 1st supplements as well. 

-6th Edition is almost done, as it had a DECADE of development already done on it, coming out in 2021.

-The Book Of Magic (that's not it's name but I can't remember what it's really called) has been pushed back in favor of 6th edition, but is almost done, they just didn't think it would make sense to publish it before starting up interest in the line again with the 6th edition. Most of the art is done and the artists are also doing the art for 6th edition.

-There will be a GM's screen with an included adventure and a short guidebook about Salisbury.

-Starter set, includes basic rules, but also an mini-campaign set during the Boy King era that has the PCs deal with an local problem. Starts at the year Arthur pulls the sword and climaxes at the Battle of Badon Hill.

-GPC 2nd edition will be published in 3(?) volumes, each covering a different group of eras, but will also come out in a full sized single volume that covers everything.

-An book focusing on Courtiers has been mentioned as an idea, but it probably won't be out for a while. (My assumption, considering he didn't go into detail about it.)

-Books covering the Uther era, as well as ones for the rulers before that are coming later down the line.

-Samurai rpg using the same system is still a go.

-So is an rpg set in mythical ancient Greece. I imagine that neither will come out for a while, tho.

[mandrill_one]

11 minutes ago, redmoongoddess said:

Note that there's also a lot of interesting things announced about the new edition in general that I've not mentioned here, as I'm away from my computer atm and can't access my full notes. I'll do another post about those things later. 

-The Book Of Magic (that's not it's name but I can't remember what it's really called)

Thanks for the summary, @redmoongoddess! By all means, do it for the new rules as well!

The book of magic is called Codex Mirabilis, and if I recall correctly, there’s also a book on religious magic in the works, called Codex Sanctus or something similar. This latter one should be at a much earlier stage of completion.

[KungFuFenris]

I need that damn book of magic

[Call Me Deacon Blues]

4 minutes ago, KungFuFenris said:

I need that damn book of magic

Me too. I'm not even interested in magician characters (not clear if that's in there or not anyway). I just want it lol

[TrippyHippy]

1 hour ago, redmoongoddess said:

So, according to you, the real sexists are the ones who want to run games where women are people?

Oh, wait, you're going to buy the new Pendragon stuff anyways despite spending your time on the thread complaining about a single npc? 

That's a funny way of saying "please ignore everything I say", should've started with that in the first place!

No. According to me, there is an irony to be found in trying to interpret an inherently sexist piece of literature through the lens of modern values. I apologise for finding humour in an area you cannot. 

I haven't complained about any npc - you appear to have the wrong person here. 

[KungFuFenris]

38 minutes ago, Call Me Deacon Blues said:

Me too. I'm not even interested in magician characters (not clear if that's in there or not anyway). I just want it lol

There's a sort of character? According to... sources... we'll get Magicians as a Supporting Character with limited playtime, a more behind the scenes experience. You'll still need to run a knight.

[Pnick]

13 hours ago, Jeff said:

So go on your merry way. Go and play your WWII game where everyone can play good National Socialists (but no Jewish characters allowed) or whatever works for you. Just do it elsewhere.

It's pretty repugnant and disingenuous what you've done there. He was saying that there are certain historical backgrounds where prejudice and limitations are fact and unavoidable. And he was using a categorically agreed historical circumstance to make the point. Of course you can work around them but you can't ignore them, not just in terms of being 'authentic' to history or 'breaking the setting' or other vague meta notions but to be respectful of what actually happened to and was endured by real people.

You know full well the point he was making. To traduce that into a statement and accusation of 'go and play your little game of the Nazi Appreciation RPG' is pretty nasty and disingenuous.

[MOB]

5 hours ago, Atgxtg said:

And don't complain when people walk away from Pendragon when you change it from what Greg had intended.

Greg could have made the game gender neutral in 1985. He didn't then, and he never did later on. Instead you guys pull this two year after his death so he can't speak out against it. 

I will restate something from the original announcement because it is important that these flat wrong assertions don't go unchallenged.

As was clearly stated in the announcement, Greg started work on this new edition ten years ago. Since that time, it has gone through multiple development phases and is at last nearly ready for its public debut. Greg called this, and always intended it to be, his “ultimate edition” and we are proud to see it finally coming to fruition.

We at Chaosium are proud to be stewards of Greg's legacy. Despite all his other groundbreaking accomplishments as a game designer, Greg considered King Arthur Pendragon to be his masterpiece, his magnum opus. What is presented here and will be presented in the 6th edition is Greg's ultimate vision for the Pendragon RPG, Greg's work, and what Greg wanted.

[weasel fierce]

59 minutes ago, TrippyHippy said:

there is an irony to be found in trying to interpret an inherently sexist piece of literature through the lens of modern values.

I mean, it's no different than the medieval writers adding more Christianity into the original Arthurian tales 🙂 

[Call Me Deacon Blues]

37 minutes ago, weasel fierce said:

I mean, it's no different than the medieval writers adding more Christianity into the original Arthurian tales 🙂 

Now, that's completely different. See, they were reading their modern values into ancient stories which we... shouldn't do? For some reason? 

[redmoongoddess]

1 hour ago, TrippyHippy said:

No. According to me, there is an irony to be found in trying to interpret an inherently sexist piece of literature through the lens of modern values.

Didn't stop Christians from adding theme of their religion to the inherently pagan Celtic tales, romanticists from adding Lancelot as a major character to the Arthurian Mythos when he was inherently absent from the start, scribes during the crusades from adding in "Saracens" who worship "Allah" and "Mahouri" when that's an inherently false oversimplification of North African cultures that includes Islam decades before it was invented (likely because they wanted to use it as an excuse to have vaguely "Islamic" villains), Greg from including options for Pagan, Wotanic, Jewish, and Saracen characters who don't have to convert to Christianity by the end of the story...

 

...Oh gods, we'll be here FOREVER if I have to explain how the entire history of the Arthurian legend is it being changed to fit the writers and readers needs...

[TrippyHippy]

12 hours ago, redmoongoddess said:

Didn't stop Christians from adding theme of their religion to the inherently pagan Celtic tales, romanticists from adding Lancelot as a major character to the Arthurian Mythos when he was inherently absent from the start, scribes during the crusades from adding in "Saracens" who worship "Allah" and "Mahouri" when that's an inherently false oversimplification of North African cultures that includes Islam decades before it was invented (likely because they wanted to use it as an excuse to have vaguely "Islamic" villains), Greg from including options for Pagan, Wotanic, Jewish, and Saracen characters who don't have to convert to Christianity by the end of the story...

 

...Oh gods, we'll be here FOREVER if I have to explain how the entire history of the Arthurian legend is it being changed to fit the writers and readers needs...

10 hours ago, weasel fierce said:

I mean, it's no different than the medieval writers adding more Christianity into the original Arthurian tales 🙂 

Both of you seem to be under the assumption that I don't know this or that I have an attitude about this. As far as I am concerned, when I have actually played Pendragon with women I know, we have had no problem about them playing whatever they want.

This is not the irony here. 

It is a tenet of feminism that both men and women are equal. To say that women should be treated as if they are equal is therefore a sexist statement, because it implies that they aren't equal.

However, creating a game based upon the society depicted in old books, that reflect feudalism as much as anything else and is inherently sexist, classist and actually a bit racist, automatically leads to the conundrum of how you create authenticity to the source without being offensive. The irony is that by making the statement of playing women as if they are equal, which is essentially how you play female knights in the game, then it is ironically being sexist even though you are playing it that way to not be sexist. 

Personally, I think it is an issue that has already been addressed well by Greg Stafford in previous editions, including the option of playing female knights, so I can't see how people can claim that the game is suddenly being ‘woke’ with a new edition that encourages female participation. However, my real point, I guess, is that if the basic argument is that people just want to have fun with the game - and fair enough - then perhaps being so serious as to miss an intended joke, is possibly, not really the best way of supporting that idea.

Edited for clarity.

 

Edited October 23, 2020 by TrippyHippy

[redmoongoddess]

44 minutes ago, TrippyHippy said:

The irony is that by suggesting that you treat women as if they are equal, which is essentially how you play female knights in the game, then its ironically being sexist even though you are playing it that way to not be sexist. 

Who worded it this way? I can't recall anyone who ever said that Pendragon should have more opportunities/focus on lady knights by saying "as if they were equal". I sure as hell didn't, so there's no reason for you to constantly say "you" in that sentence. 

If someone DID say it that way, that either means:

1. They meant "as if FEUDAL SOCIETY treated them as equal" not "as if THEY were equal".

2. Their understanding of English is as an second language to them. 

or 3. They just didn't proof read the post before hitting the submit button.

And either way it's extremely dickish behavior to use what is most probably an honest mistake to win an argument about Pendragon's depiction of women. It's nit picky at best -and- deliberately misleading at worse. And nether read well on your position in this thread.

[MOB]

WEARING MOD HAT AGAIN

As stated earlier in this thread:

This thread has diverged a long way from the initial topic. Folks, you want to continue having a discussion about representation of female characters across the editions of KAP, please go start another thread.

Update: in fact, one such thread has already started:

 

Edited October 23, 2020 by MOB

[Greyblade]

People, please STOP with the already mentioned topic. You are hijacking a thread that was created to cover & discuss 6th edition at large, not just the ONE topic that some of you have decided to make a cause for arguments and name calling. This has nothing to do within the confines of this forum, and reflects poorly on the community.

If you want to discuss this very topic, please switch to the other thread, as mentioned by the mod.

Thank you all for being reasonable

 

[Dimbyd]

I’m really looking forward to the new edition. Which will be such a radical change that pretty much all previous editions’ adventures will be compatible.

People do realise that Arthur didn’t exist; that Greg introduced some amazing gaming elements of progressing technology; and Greg misled you all on the correct pronounciation of “Cymric” . 
 

Having a new edition with the production values of recent RQG & CoC with widespread distribution will help grow the game. And from what  I understand of the proposed releases- there’s real thought being put in to support the line. 
 

 

 

 

[weasel fierce]

Wait so is it in fact "Symric" and not "Kymric" ?

[Dimbyd]

Cymric- come-rick

[KungFuFenris]

Really? Wow.

[Dr_Zarnak]

Since Chaosium is making this push to make the game more welcoming, how about including more Asian-looking characters in the art? The characters don't have to be Asian (although that would be nice!), just make them look Asian so gamers from that part of the world will feel they aren't being excluded. How about it?

[KungFuFenris]

Sure, I'd for that. Though, Pendragon is a game about a lot of historical populations, and have sought to emulate their game world through art.

I could see something happen in that effect. But, talking East Asian? That might be difficult, West Asian might be easier, especially in King Arthur's immense cosmopolitan years. Like, there are Arabic, Saracen and Byzantine characters in certain versions of the legend.

Wait, honestly, it might be plausible to see someone of Asian heirtage as a Hun character or Hun adjecent character in the expansion books.
There'd be a few chances of someone of Hun heirtage to have ended up in Britain. I'd be up for that.
 

Edited October 23, 2020 by KungFuFenris

[Dr_Zarnak]

There is archaeological evidence that the Romans brought East Asian slaves to Britain:

https://www.history.com/news/possible-chinese-skeletons-could-rewrite-roman-history

 

[KungFuFenris]

4 minutes ago, Dr_Zarnak said:

There is archaeological evidence that the Romans brought East Asian slaves to Britain:

https://www.history.com/news/possible-chinese-skeletons-could-rewrite-roman-history

 

Cool! That might have some ways to have E. Asians around. I'm down for that.

[Leingod]

2 hours ago, KungFuFenris said:

Sure, I'd for that. Though, Pendragon is a game about a lot of historical populations, and have sought to emulate their game world through art.

I could see something happen in that effect. But, talking East Asian? That might be difficult, West Asian might be easier, especially in King Arthur's immense cosmopolitan years. Like, there are Arabic, Saracen and Byzantine characters in certain versions of the legend.

Wait, honestly, it might be plausible to see someone of Asian heirtage as a Hun character or Hun adjecent character in the expansion books.
There'd be a few chances of someone of Hun heirtage to have ended up in Britain. I'd be up for that.
 

As the Book of Knights & Ladies notes, any knight in the literature who's supposed to be from "Hungary," notably Sir Urré, is probably a Hun. Or at least is probably from any number of steppe peoples active in the area like the Avars, Bulgars, Magyars, etc. that would often be lumped in with the Huns. Notably, Sir Sagramore is supposedly the son of the "King of Hungary" and a sister of the Byzantine Emperor, meaning he's half-Hun and half-Greek. And if you want such a character to arrive in Britain earlier, you can posit that some Hunnic nobles or warriors got taken captive in the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains and couldn't arrange a ransom payment to get back to the continent and ended up just sticking around, likely as an ornament of the court - you know, a feather in the king's cap to parade around that he's got a "Hunnic prince" in his entourage.

And, of course, you could really justify any "Roman" character as coming from just about anywhere that Rome once ruled or at least was in close contact with (and thus would inevitably have mingled with at the borders), from Africa to the Near East.

And, yes, there's the potential for former Roman slaves of East Asian descent (perhaps sold to the empire through the Huns) who might still retain those features.

Edited October 23, 2020 by Leingod

[Morien]

2 hours ago, KungFuFenris said:

There'd be a few chances of someone of Hun heirtage to have ended up in Britain. I'd be up for that.

There is Sir Urre, from Hungary, later on. (Sniped by Leingod, by a minute while I was checking GPC!)

However, the Huns probably had a good mixture of populations (and even their origins is also debated, with the majority opinion seemingly being a more Turkic than Mongol or a mix of the two) already by mid-400s, and were wiped out as a ruling power soon after Attila's death. That being said, Belisarius still used Hun mercenaries in his Wars, so they are still around in 500s.

However, there is an adventure in GPC where I would be willing to bet money that the sorcerer in a king's service is coming from China...