What GURPS needs... now

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by johndallman

Adventures normally happen in summer. A knight is not needed on his estate at that time, and the weather is better. People have travelled around and spread news during the spring, so a knight can have heard about something that needs his attention, or been assigned a mission by his lord.

Adventures can be quite varied. Knights are the people with freedom to move around in Logres. All the other social groups have restrictions or expectations that limit their activities, but knights are expected to go out and have strange adventures. Further, they expect this: there's usually no need to justify the start of an adventure showing up for a knight, and it being well-suited to him.

So knights are wandering righters of wrongs, enforcers of laws, detectives, ambassadors, courtiers ... all kinds of things, although they are (almost) all warriors as well. Their overall purpose is to maintain the king's peace, the era of calm and prosperity that has come with Arthur's uniquely just rule, and which everyone fears will end when he dies.

OK, the lengthy Pendragon campaign I played was somewhat mystical and definitely T.H.White influenced, but I hope the idea is clear.

It definitely helps. Though a couple of questions:

KAP talks about "solos" in Winter Phase. Are those adventures? How do they differ from other adventures?

What are knights doing in spring and fall? I get that during winter they're mostly maintaining their lands, but if adventures happen mainly in summer, what are the other two seasons for?

If C is playing a woman, I get that she could be a warrior (at least in 4/e) or a sorceress; but are there things in KAP for courtly ladies to do? Or is that something that's not supported by the official rules, or not much?

[Phil Masters]

Originally Posted by CraigM

So what's the difference? Is it that fantasy has a richer library of popular archetypal plots? Or is Banestorm just written with more hooks?

I suspect that it may be partly related to the fact that the strong default solution to a serious problem in a fantasy-medieval setting is "stick a sword in it".

Sure, there are fantasy problems that can't be solved by violence, and countless SF problems that are. But the very basic default problem-solving team in heroic fantasy is a bunch of fantasy heroes, with swords and spells and stuff. Solving diplomatic crises or memetic attacks or smart-matter virus infestations requires something a little more refined.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I think the suggestion is more like Transhuman Space should have included a chapter with one or a few fleshed out campaign frames.

Well, the Personnel Files series was in part supposed to answer that shortage. Possibly a little too indirectly.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Maybe not that well if one of the smartest people here couldn't figure out how to run it.

How can people not see how to run Madness Dossier when the gaming world is full of groups playing Delta Green and other Call of Cthulhu variants? It's just a difference in furniture!

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by Phil Masters

How can people not see how to run Madness Dossier when the gaming world is full of groups playing Delta Green and other Call of Cthulhu variants? It's just a difference in furniture!

Well, it may not be "people"; it may be me. I've no more than glanced at Delta Green a couple of times; what I saw of it didn't give me any sense of "Wow, I could run a campaign in this!" so I haven't looked at it closely. When I ran CoC the campaign ended up based in a New Orleans sporting house; when I ran Laundry Files I focused on a team of super-powered agents (and not the maskirovka superteam in The Annihilation Score). I've never run a spy campaign, either Bond-style or Smiley-style; I played in one, but it self-destructed due to the inability of many of the players to make any sense of what was going on, including me. So let's say I don't think I have a good mental model of what's supposed to be going on.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Well, it may not be "people"; it may be me.

At least two other posters said they wanted an adventure other than "Iraqi Irruptor Blues" so they could get an understanding of how to run it.

Although I have to say at that point we are getting into the "I don't know what I want but it isn't that" territory, that makes it very difficult to satisfy people.

[RogerBW]

Originally Posted by whswhs

KAP talks about "solos" in Winter Phase. Are those adventures? How do they differ from other adventures?

OK, Pendragon 4e really isn't a great place to start. It's trying too hard to be a generic fantasy game. I mean, it has magic rules! If you can get hold of 5e there's a fair bit more guidance; 5e + the Great Pendragon Campaign is the canonical full package.

Broadly "summer phase" is the full group, "winter phase" is bookkeeping.

This is off-topic so I'll send you email.

[evileeyore]

Originally Posted by lordabdul

In my case, I often (but not always) fall back to published adventures, because I'm just trying it out. If I want to try TimeWatch or Wild Talents or Numenera or Unknown Armies, I may not want to go through the trouble of writing my own adventure -- especially since I don't actually know yet what makes any of those games... well... be that game. I don't want to play a TimeWatch game that will really be a D&D plot with some time travel on top. I want to play something that was written by someone who truly understand what makes TimeWatch be TimeWatch, so that I then understand it, and can, maybe by the second adventure, write my own. It's especially important for very "moody" games like Unknown Armies or Puppetland -- I would probably run a couple published adventures before I would even attempt to write my own, otherwise I don't know if I would write the correct "feel".

My take exactly!

Except i'm less likely to try to run something cold and instead try to get into a game being run by someone that other people claim "run a great [INSERT RPG SETTING] game". So I can get a feel as a Player.


Upon reflection this is probably why I run so many Fallout and Gamma World style games (both sci-fi and fantasy takes). I know the setting/genre so well I know where to keep things and where to make changes to fit what I want to run but still be true to the feel of the core concept of the setting/genre.

Or to completely subvert it. Whichever I'm doing.

So to me it's not really about having a core conflict, but having a core campaign framework. That's what makes the viability/usefulness of published adventures so much higher.

Yeah, I think that encapsulates my notions completely.

Originally Posted by Refplace

I actually liked Mad Lands better.

OMG! Me too!

[Phil Masters]

Originally Posted by whswhs

Well, it may not be "people"; it may be me. I've no more than glanced at Delta Green a couple of times; what I saw of it didn't give me any sense of "Wow, I could run a campaign in this!" so I haven't looked at it closely. When I ran CoC the campaign ended up based in a New Orleans sporting house; when I ran Laundry Files I focused on a team of super-powered agents (and not the maskirovka superteam in The Annihilation Score). I've never run a spy campaign, either Bond-style or Smiley-style; I played in one, but it self-destructed due to the inability of many of the players to make any sense of what was going on, including me. So let's say I don't think I have a good mental model of what's supposed to be going on.

And yet, you've run investigative games... The default pattern of this sort of game is surely just an investigation (featuring some of the peculiar elements of the setting), very possibly followed by a fight (which can be horribly desperate if the investigation wasn't handled right).

But then, I guess I don't sweat it much about making scenarios overly "appropriate" to a game world. I just find that encouraging PCs either to poke things curiously with sticks, or prod things hard with pointy sticks, keeps most players happy.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by evileeyore

OMG! Me too!

"What if the Hundred Acre Wood was a dark fantasy setting?" strikes me as a much more inspired premise than "How can the most generic tropes common to 80s FRPG settings be rationalized?"

[whswhs]

Originally Posted by RogerBW

This is off-topic so I'll send you email.

Thanks! I look forward to hearing what you have to say. John has also PMed me with some helpful further explanation.

I have to say that I'm probably not going to invest in 5/e or The Great Pendragon Campaign at this point. For one thing this is a tryout; for another it may be only a few sessions—once the school year starts C's time will be scarce. Maybe sometime later on if it lives up to its reputation.

[lordabdul]

Originally Posted by whswhs

When I decided to try Space 1889, I said to the players, "Your characters are members of a superteam based in London." When I ran Call of Cthulhu I dumped the Cthulhu Mythos entirely and took my horror motifs from American black folklore. (.....) None of those was the standard campaign for that rules system (or that setting, if the rules system came with one).

Well, I applaud your originality, am impressed by your multi-faceted talents, and definitely envy your free time :)

I just hope you are managing your players' expectations accordingly. I would be upset if I signed up for a specific game, and got something completely different instead. But I assume you're doing fine there.

Originally Posted by evileeyore

Except i'm less likely to try to run something cold and instead try to get into a game being run by someone that other people claim "run a great [INSERT RPG SETTING] game". So I can get a feel as a Player.

Ah yeah but it's probably tricky to find a group for a lot of those games, and besides I like playing a GM a lot more than as a character.