King Arthur Pendragon (info please)
Oleg Kiselev
In short, the game is yet another variant of RQ. The problem with the
game is its limited time scope and... its realism!
Time frame is the most restrictive I've encuntered since Salem Witch Hunt. You
have on the order of a century, with things happening as they did in King Arthur
mythos.Then again, if your character sets out at the age of 18-19, dies around
35 ( if you are THAT good and THAT lucky!) you have at least 5 characters to go
through....
Realism is one of the major strives of the RQ-based systems. Internal logic and
concistency are one of the main advantages ( and DISadvatages) of this game (and
most other Chaosium games). If your forte is killing dragons and giants and
heal all wounds overnight ( or, by spell, in 1 round ) stick to D&D. In this
game a broken leg will take you out ofcirculation for 3-4 weeks of gametime.
Same happens with magic. Just think of what kind of magic was used in Round
Table stories. Uh-huh! Merlin, Morgan le Fay (sp?), and few other NPCs is all
the magic you'll see.
SUMMARY: A good game. Needs a REALLY GOOD Game Master who KNOWS the period and
its mythos, and understands the inner logic of the system. Requires SERIOUS
players. Seems to be a lot of fun when those conditions are satisfied.
NOT a HEROIC fantasy, just FANTASY HEROES....
--
Disclamer: My employers go to church every Sunday, listen to Country music,
and donate money to GOP. I am just a deviant.
+-------------------------------+ Don't bother, I'll find the door!
| "VIOLATORS WILL BE TOAD!" | Oleg Kiselev.
| Dungeon Police |...!{trwrb|scgvaxd}!felix!birtch!oleg
--------------------------------+...!{ihnp4|randvax}!ucla-cs!uclapic!oac6!oleg
Rick Heli
>
> In short, the game is yet another variant of RQ. The problem with the
> game is its limited time scope and... its realism!
>
> Time frame is the most restrictive I've encuntered since Salem Witch Hunt.
Thanks for the review! I've been wanting to try Witch Hunt for a
long time. What is it like?
Doctor Who
>
> In short, the game is yet another variant of RQ. The problem with the
> game is its limited time scope and... its realism!
First comment. Pendragon is not JUST another variant of RQ. The
personality traits are definitely something new. There is no
percentile-based system like RQ, and combat is definitely different.
>
> Time frame is the most restrictive I've encuntered since Salem Witch
> Hunt. You have on the order of a century, with things happening as
> they did in King Arthur mythos.Then again, if your character sets out
> at the age of 18-19, dies around 35 ( if you are THAT good and THAT
> lucky!) you have at least 5 characters to go through....
>
Next comment. If you play one game a week and at an average of, say,
2 years per game, then you have a one year campaign. However, it
doesn't say anywhere that you have to follow the Arthurian timeline
to the letter. Oh sure, you should keep the MAJOR events intact,
like the Battle of Camlann, or Guenever's kidnapping (it happens
3 times in all of the books!), but who knows when Gawaine (or a PC)
meets the Green Knight? And as far as having only 6 characters or so,
what about said knight's children? There's nothing to stop you playing
the two of them co-terminously.
>
> Realism is one of the major strives of the RQ-based systems. Internal
> logic and concistency are one of the main advantages (and
> DISadvatages) of this game (and most other Chaosium games). If your
> forte is killing dragons and giants and heal all wounds overnight
> (or, by spell, in 1 round ) stick to D&D. In this game a broken leg
> will take you out ofcirculation for 3-4 weeks of gametime.
>
Why is reality a disadvantage? Oh sure it can be taken to great
excess, but if reality can be put into the game without greatly
or not-so-greatly disturbing balance, put it in! As for being out
for 3-4 weeks, first, if you're with other PC's, it's likely that
they need 3-4 (or more) weeks. So you have company in your misery.
If you should be the unlucky one, I would certainly let you heal
before the all of you went adventuring again (unless you made a
Generous roll and let them go :-).
>
> Same happens with magic. Just think of what kind of magic was used in
> Round Table stories. Uh-huh! Merlin, Morgan le Fay (sp?), and few
> other NPCs is all the magic you'll see.
>
While it's true that most players will never do any magic (unless
you're playing a woman with the gift of potion-making), this is
realistic. Knights didn't get involved with magic on that personal
a level. Since there will be no PC magicians, when explaining
the magic of Merlin, Morgan, Nimue, Vivian, etc, ad nauseum, just
explain it as the characters see it ("There is a great flash of
light and puff of smoke which blinds your eyes and stings your noses.
When your eyes clear, Merlin is standing before you, crotchety as
ever." rather than "Merlin Teleports right in front of you.")
>
> SUMMARY: A good game. Needs a REALLY GOOD Game Master who KNOWS the
> period and its mythos, and understands the inner logic of the system.
> Requires SERIOUS players. Seems to be a lot of fun when those
> conditions are satisfied. NOT a HEROIC fantasy, just FANTASY HEROES.
>
I agree that Pendragon needs a good GM. As for players, I think that
they just have to want to play. Stupid knights get killed quickly.
Look for the next Pendragon supplement, "The Nobles Book" to come out
in early (say March?) 1986, in which those PC's who have advanced to
become barons, earls, and dukes can now run their own fiefs, build
castles, lay and defend against sieges, etc. Following this, look
for "Arthur, the Boy King", a collection of scenarios during Phase 2
of Arthur's reign.
The New Number Who, oka...@BERKELEY.EDU
Jeff Okamoto ..!ucbvax!okamoto
Oleg Kiselev
>I've been wanting to try Witch Hunt for a
>long time. What is it like?
The only info I have on Witch Hunt is whatever the reviewer said in one of
the old Dragon issues, which was nothing good. Time frame of a week or two,
unrealistic combat rules, unpleasant game overall.
Plus, any game that takes what happened in Salem at its face value as sold
by the Church is below my contempt.
As long as we are on the Church subject:
******FLAME ON!***********
I have stumbled accross a singularly unpleasant publication called "The Ultimate
Role Playing" (?or something to that extend) which advertises itsef to be a
compleate guide and manual for any and all FRPG.
Well, I looked through it and here is what it is : an unrealistic, amateurish,
contrived attempt at creating an FRPG based on Jehovah(Christianity)/Satan
(the rest of the world) conflict.
Magic is Good only if its granted through prayer from God (Jehovah).
All phylosophies are based on 12-14 century Christian thought and the SCA-type
embelishment of the actual medieval life. NON-CHRISTIAN religions and magic
are given a very short chapter in the end of the book (appendix?).
Overall, the book was irritating more than anything else. Here we have a
published attempt of someone's game design marketed as a deceisive and
fundamental work on the entire FRPG field. And, unlike other works in its
genre (Basic Role Playing from Chaosium, ICE, Claw/Weapon/Magic Law, etc),
this publication blithely(sp?) ignores all th previously done work and takes
a basic D&D-ish approach as the paramount Game Design.
What really pissed me off is the warped description of everything non-christian.
The audacious assumption that only a Baptised Christian can be Good and
everything NON-Christian is Bad, is allied with Satan and should be destroyed
is revolting and serves to further the disinformation and anti-FRPG propaganda
the Christian Church and rabid "Born-Again"s have been dissemenating.
What a joke if some well meaning parent buys this trashy book as a present for
their teen-ager who gets interested in gaming. "Here is your present! You wanted
those AD&D books, but there was 6(7?) of them so I bought you this one! It's
just one book and you'll learn EVERYTHING from it!"