I'm giving Swords & Wizardry a break for a while. I'll always love it; it's the easiest system to hack and home-brew that I've yet seen, but there are other games to play too. I'll surely return to Swords & Wizardry again.
What our Skype gaming group will turn to next is in question. I sent everyone an email today asking what they wanted to do for the next few months and suggesting Traveller, Tunnels & Trolls, Risus and, above all, Pendragon.
Playing a Pendragon game is my first choice of the four; some of the very first books that got me into fantasy were Ladybird childrens' adaptations of Arthurian legend. I've also got The Great Pendragon Campaign and The Grey Knight, so I won't be lacking for adventures and prep can be a lot less than it would be if I were mapping out a megadungeon.
Playing a Pendragon game is my first choice of the four; some of the very first books that got me into fantasy were Ladybird childrens' adaptations of Arthurian legend. I've also got The Great Pendragon Campaign and The Grey Knight, so I won't be lacking for adventures and prep can be a lot less than it would be if I were mapping out a megadungeon.
I've got some questions for those who are knowledgable about Pendragon, though:
1) I own the first edition of Pendragon; it was surprisingly low-priced on Amazon when I bought it. If you were me, would you look into any other editions of Pendragon, or one of the supplements? How difficult do you think it will be to run stuff from the GPC, which is (at least my copy is) written for fifth edition?
2) The first edition has about four pages on running female characters; is that, in your opinion, enough? Do you have any particular advice for refereeing a game with a mix of PC genders?
3) Pendragon has a system of personality traits. It seems like it would be easy for a beginner like me to use this in ways that force PCs to do what the dice say instead of what players want them to do, or else ignore the traits system all-together. The former seems to me like it would be anathema to the Old School, which is confusing to me, since Pendragon is certainly an Old School game, while the latter would be leaving out a huge part of Pendragon. How do you handle traits? How do you know when to let a player decide what a PC does and when to have the player roll? Does this really conflict with the OSR vision of player-controlled PCs, of "role-playing over roll-playing," to borrow that controversial phrase?
4) Another grognardling-who-is-still-learning-the-Old-Ways-and-isn't-sure-how-Pendragon-fits-with-the-gaming-philosophy-he-learned-which-was-about-Dungeons-&-Dragons question: Would sand-boxing be feasible with Pendragon, do you think? I mean, technically, yeah, you can sandbox with any game system, but would sandboxing Pendragon work against the feel that Pendragon is going for?
4) Another grognardling-who-is-still-learning-the-Old-Ways-and-isn't-sure-how-Pendragon-fits-with-the-gaming-philosophy-he-learned-which-was-about-Dungeons-&-Dragons question: Would sand-boxing be feasible with Pendragon, do you think? I mean, technically, yeah, you can sandbox with any game system, but would sandboxing Pendragon work against the feel that Pendragon is going for?
5) Do you have any other advice for running Pendragon? Is there anything I should know or try or avoid? (I'm familiar with, and have poked around on, Greg Stafford's Pendragon Page and I've been following Sir Larkins' Solo GPC reports for a good while now.)
I'm very happy that you're feeling the love for Pendragon, it's a truly wonderful game. I've been running it for many years, so here are my thoughts, for what they're worth.
ReplyDelete1) You can use ist edition to run a very enjoyable game of Pendragon. Running stuff from later editions will require little in the way of conversion work.
2)The 3rd edition supplement 'Knights Advenrurous' contains more information on female characters. This is my personal go-to edition of the game.
3) Regarding Traits, any trait of 16 or higher should always be rolled when provoked by a situation in the game. There is no compulsion on the player to roll for any trait under 16, unless he wants to of course. We tend to do this when a player can't quite decide which way his character would go in a given situation. "Would I be Worldly or Pious, here? Let's see!" .
4) I don't think that Pendragon is particularly suited to sandbox play, but give it a whirl and see how you get on!
5)Your best bet is to dive into a few sessions and then ask questions as they arise.
1. Every edition is 98% the same. The biggest change from the 1st to later editions is the way languages are handled [not a big deal].
ReplyDelete2. The 5th edition has some more information, if you're interested. Check out the female specific 5th edition character sheet. You should be able to piece a few more things together from there.
3. The way I play, I allow the players to call upon traits that below 16 for aid in difficult situations. I don't call for a roll to see what the character does until the trait is 16 or higher.
4. The best Pendragon game I ever ran was based around Le Morte DArthur. Depending if the PCs wanted to get involved to not, things would happen on or off stage. What made is super fun is that Arthur lost and was killed in the battle immediately proceeding pulling sword from the stone. It was a blast!
5. Don't take it too seriously unless everyone in the group wants to go in that direction.
First off, thanks for being a regular reader of my GPC posts! :)
ReplyDeleteIan nailed most of the salient points. "Edition" is a pretty misleading term when it comes to Pendragon; "Revision" might be more appropriate. As you can see from Greg Stafford's site, the game is constantly evolving, even now. If anything, the main difference between editions is a matter of focus. So 1st edition is pure "knights & ladies," 3rd to 4th gradually broaden the scope by bringing in foreign knights, sorcerers, holy men, and so forth, then 5th brings it back to knights and ladies. I think you're safe sticking with 1st edition and any rules hacks you want to skim off Stafford's site. Pendragon's a robust system and can take a lot of tinkering.
Having said that, keep Traits central! The idea that player agency is a fundamental and sacrosanct tenet of old-school play only really applies to D&D. Other games with plenty of old school pedigree force players to take actions against their will (Call of Cthulhu's sanity rules are another example that leap immediately to mind). Remember, the Arthurian cycle's central theme, if there is one, is of great people doing dumb things against their better interests. Like Ian said, only Traits of 16 or higher should force rolls, but encourage your players to make opposed Trait rolls with lesser scores for the fun of it. It really helps drive the story and development of individual personalities.
You could certainly run Pendragon sandbox-style (it's something I've considered myself), and 1st edition has a great map for that--the later edition maps don't place landmarks like 1st edition does. Take a look at the "scenarios" at the end of the Uther Period chapter in the GPC; they provide guidelines for knights riding through foreign territory or guarding their own lands. Consider picking up a PDF of one of the regional sourcebooks from the 4th edition days, like Savage Mountains or Beyond the Wall. These feature very detailed regional maps and site keys that would facilitate plenty of sandbox play. Another, more esoteric option is this rather obscure Arthurian RPG from the 80s called Hidden Kingdom. I wouldn't play the game straight, but it comes with a sandbox-style map and rules for running a sort of sandbox/exploration-style Arthurian campaign that could probably be hacked into Pendragon pretty easily.
As for running a mixed group of knights and ladies, one trick I've heard of is - if you have just one Lady character in your group - having the other player knights swear allegiance to the lady as her personal honor guard. Everyone generates a Loyalty (Lady) passion and you're off. Then just make sure you're balancing combat-centered encounters with courtly action where the Lady can shine (and definitely make use of the Pageant rules from Stafford's site) and it should be fine.
You mentioned you own The Grey Knight; as I noted when I ran that scenario, if you're not planning on going whole hog and running the entire GPC, The Grey Knight is a perfect way to kick off a campaign. You introduce a lot of the movers and shakers, Arthur's court, tournaments, the Wastelands, etc., plus it's set early enough in Arthur's reign that you can have a nice, extended campaign stretching into two or even three generations if you want to go all the way to Camlann. It's sort of a set-up for a GPC Lite.
1) I own the first edition of Pendragon; it was surprisingly low-priced on Amazon when I bought it. If you were me, would you look into any other editions of Pendragon, or one of the supplements? How difficult do you think it will be to run stuff from the GPC, which is (at least my copy is) written for fifth edition?
ReplyDeleteI have run all editions, and am currently running two 1st edition campaigns as I like the old school vibe. I am borrowing liberally from GPC with no conversion issues
2) The first edition has about four pages on running female characters; is that, in your opinion, enough? Do you have any particular advice for refereeing a game with a mix of PC genders?
In all my campaigns, you play a knight and you are male. Zillions of other games can let you play female characters. Just my opinion.
3) Pendragon has a system of personality traits. It seems like it would be easy for a beginner like me to use this in ways that force PCs to do what the dice say instead of what players want them to do, or else ignore the traits system all-together. The former seems to me like it would be anathema to the Old School, which is confusing to me, since Pendragon is certainly an Old School game, while the latter would be leaving out a huge part of Pendragon. How do you handle traits? How do you know when to let a player decide what a PC does and when to have the player roll? Does this really conflict with the OSR vision of player-controlled PCs, of "role-playing over roll-playing," to borrow that controversial phrase?
Players generally decide what they want to do, and get a check for it. However, in times of great stress, characters may not always do what the player wishes - that is what traits are for. You can always charge a bandit, but a giant? Roll Valorous. You can decide on your love life, but Morgan le Fay tries to seduce you and has magical power to back it up? Roll Chaste/Lustful. To see this in action, you can got to makofan.proboards.com and read some of my campaign threads.
4) Another grognardling-who-is-still-learning-the-Old-Ways-and-isn't-sure-how-Pendragon-fits-with-the-gaming-philosophy-he-learned-which-was-about-Dungeons-&-Dragons question: Would sand-boxing be feasible with Pendragon, do you think? I mean, technically, yeah, you can sandbox with any game system, but would sandboxing Pendragon work against the feel that Pendragon is going for?
I am half sandbox, half railroad. I usually have two or three adventure ideas, and give the players the one they want, unless political reality interferes. But within the railroad, I try to make the players' choices meaningful. Greg Stafford has been quoted on many occasions that Pendragon is a game about consequences.
5) Do you have any other advice for running Pendragon? Is there anything I should know or try or avoid? (I'm familiar with, and have poked around on, Greg Stafford's Pendragon Page and I've been following Sir Larkins' Solo GPC reports for a good while now.)
Let the dice fall where they may - Pendragon is deadly; respect that. Do try to get some famous knights in every four or five years; my players hate Pellinore now. Allow the wacky things that happen to take the game off in new directions; it will surprise both you and your players. Keep a lid on Glory and Land inflation; be very stingy.