Arthurian gaming

[combatmedic]

Has anybody here run or played an Arthurian campaign?

I've just bought King Arthur Pendragon. It's a great system, and the game seems very true to the source materials.

[ULFGARD]

I played in one for awhile, but not long enough to truly get the feel for it. I liked it a lot. Do they still use the crazy character generation where you can die (or am I confusing it with Traveler)? And do they still have no Int/Wis type of stat? The guys I was playing it with unfortunately interpreted this to mean that it isn't a "thinking man's" game. I thought that was stupid, as I later bought a supplement to use for a time travel adventure I ran years ago -- the adventures it contained seemed well thought out, and therefore would have been DEATH to simply charge in swords swinging.

[combatmedic]

Originally Posted by ULFGARD

I played in one for awhile, but not long enough to truly get the feel for it. I liked it a lot. Do they still use the crazy character generation where you can die (or am I confusing it with Traveler)? And do they still have no Int/Wis type of stat? The guys I was playing it with unfortunately interpreted this to mean that it isn't a "thinking man's" game. I thought that was stupid, as I later bought a supplement to use for a time travel adventure I ran years ago -- the adventures it contained seemed well thought out, and therefore would have been DEATH to simply charge in swords swinging.

So far as I know, KAP characters have never died during generation. That's Classic Traveller.


There is no INT/WIS stat. There's actually no need for such a thing.

What is 'wisdom'? In D&D, it's actually a mixture of several things: prudence or lack thereof, awareness of the spiritual world, perceptiveness, willpower, etc.


Pendragon has all that, but it doesn't place it all in one score.

The system has thirteen pairs of opposing personality traits on a 1-20 scale, with the 20 points for each pair split between the opposed traits. For example: Chaste 16/Lustful 4. If you want to be a wise and even-handed knight, boost your Just and Prudent traits. If you want to be a foolish and vainglorious knight, boost your Proud and Reckless traits. Want to be unshakably brave, even in the face of sorcery and monsters? Boost Valorous. A spiritually adept character might have a high Pious trait.


If a player's knight had a high Prudent trait, yet was about to do something very reckless, a quick roll against that trait behind the screen might be in order. If he made it, I'd tell the player something like: '''Hmmmm...Sir Ulfgard is known among his peers for his good judgment. Is this proposed course of action really the way he'd proceed? Maybe he would consider the risk posed by...."


Traits lower than 16 will not normally force rolls, but they can still be used by the player or the GM to help move the game along and keep PCs and NPCs alike on track and in character. These unforced rolls are strictly optional, of course!


If you want a character that is simply very aware of his surroundings, boost his awareness skill .

I could give more examples, but I think you see why a vague sort of 'wisdom' score isn't really needed.


As for 'intelligence', that's an easy one.

Skills cover a lot of ground in regards to 'intelligence.' If you want to play a scholarly, learned knight, just put a lot of points into lore skills. If you want to play cunning, intelligent battle-leader and tactician, put more points into the Battle skill.


As a GM, if I had a player whose knight was supposed to be an intelligent and talented tactician (with a suitably high Battle skill) and said player was about to commit a gross tactical error, I'd roll behind the screen. If he made the roll, I'd offer some good advice. See, no INT or WIS necessary.


The experience and skill systems don't work like in GURPS, and there is no 'magic system' (except in 4E Pendragon, and even the designer doesn't seem keen on that- it was tacked on to satisfy people who wanted more sharply defined magical effects) so an INT score isn't mechanically necessary.

Everything else about 'INT' or 'WIS' is basically just roleplaying. It comes from the player's portrayal of the PC.

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by combatmedic

Has anybody here run or played an Arthurian campaign?

I've just bought King Arthur Pendragon. It's a great system, and the game seems very true to the source materials.

It's very true to Mallory, somewhat true to White, totally counter to several more recent authors...

Greg Stafford picked his sources and stuck to them.

I have run 4th and 5th ed. I won't do 5th again, but 4th might work.

I've acutally run several long campaigns of Pendragon. In one, several players were playing their initial character's son; it ended because they broke the timeline (by preventing Arthur from disinterring Bran's Head).

The things to remember for KAP...
1) time is supposed to pass regularly. Don't let a year take more than 2 sessions
2) The game is STRONGLY focused upon the campaign mode; one-shots don't highlight the system well at all.
3) Landholding is a great way to share the GMing load... if most of the PC's are vassals of one PC. † You can have the PC Lord assign the missions for the PC's, especially in response to random events.
4) There is a surprisingly large amount of bookkeeping for landed characters - it's best handled outside sessions when possible.
5) Keeping a roll of Arms makes a great fun prop. Especially when one adds NPC's to it as well. ‡
6) Don't forget Glory adds to a bunch of skills' uses, but only when known... if no one recognizes you, and your heraldry is hidden or unknown, it's not a help... Give them reasons to flaunt and to hide their identity over different occasions.
7) The traits system can be a powerful too for shaping player behaviors. Use it as such.
8) 4E Magic is very potent, but INCREDIBLY slow. It requires as much bookkeeping as a Barony. It's not overbalancing, but it's a very different kind of contribution, and needs a very patient player. Greg doesn't like it, but a significant subset of GM's do.

† In my KAP4E campaigns, this was usually a result of random rolls for father's class... one wound up heir to a Lord in almost every one, so I just had the others vassals of that Lord.
‡ Don't forget augmentations, either... both good and ill... One knight had Purpure, per pale a chalice between two swords point to base Or, on a canton sinister sable bordered Ar, a one-eyed snake affronty arising from its coils Ar. The canton was a specific "enhancement" for being late for battle due to "quality time" with local peasant women... with the line, "If you can't keep it inside your trews, wear it upon your shield"...

[combatmedic]

I've purchased 3rd edition KAP along with Knights Adventurous. That's basically 4E, but without the expanded magic rules.

I'm in the 'no detailed magic system needed, and no PC magicians' camp. Magic is basically just special effects designed by the GM.


I like that KAP tends to stick to the classic Matter of Britain sources and doesn't give us a post-modern, 'Dung Ages', feminist, or neo-pagan Arthurian world.


Of course, the game system is surprisingly flexible, and will handle more than one take on the mythos.


My KAP game will have a few differences from the official/default KAP stuff-

I don't like the idea of a century worth of technological and cultural change for every decade of Arthur's reign. That's too fast for my taste. I'll slow it down, but retain the sense of a flowering of the arts and sciences under Arthur's rule.


I have always found the whole 'Merlin is the Arch druid' thing to be a bit odd. I don't use it.

[combatmedic]

That knight's coat of arms is comedy gold, Aramis!

Heh, one eyed snake...

[Apache]

Ran the default campaign way back in the day; my players started out as knights sworn to Uther, and ended the game playing their grandsons (or great-grandsons...) dying in the final battle vs Mordred.

Was great fun.

[combatmedic]

Originally Posted by Apache

Ran the default campaign way back in the day; my players started out as knights sworn to Uther, and ended the game playing their grandsons (or great-grandsons...) dying in the final battle vs Mordred.

Was great fun.

That's truly epic.

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by combatmedic

That knight's coat of arms is comedy gold, Aramis!

Heh, one eyed snake...

Given by Uther, no less. The irony was wonderful... that campaign, Sir Talroc, for that was his name... Yes, Sir Talroc of Silchester, since he was from Silchester... The knight in question was riding with Uther, on their way to go sack a castle in Cornwall... Talroc lived to see Arthur on the Throne. In fact, he was a witness to the drawing of the sword the first time (he'd not enough Glory for the tourney... and was suffering a bit of melancholy from a failed inspire on flirting to get the ladies of the review to let him in anyway)...

Another from that game, Sir Coelric, used "per fess gules and azure, a fess wavy (of one crest and trough) argent bearing an axe with head to sinister Vert." Can you tell the inspiration?