Page 2 of 2

Re: First significant TOR game

Posted: Mon Jan 13, 2014 1:51 pm
by Angelalex242
I've played Pendragon too. It's...really virtue oriented, as if I'd dug up my old NES Ultima:Quest of the Avatar game. Farming virtues is the way to be, because being chivalrous and religious are both really important. And...you can't start being chivalrous or religious, you have to virtue farm to get there.

Re: First significant TOR game

Posted: Mon Jan 13, 2014 3:45 pm
by Elmoth
Wow. Never thought of playing Pendragon (or Ars magica, for that fact, that has a similar approach) as if it was a computer game.

I hope I never will.

Re: First significant TOR game

Posted: Mon Jan 13, 2014 4:12 pm
by Rich H
Angelalex242 wrote:I've played Pendragon too. It's...really virtue oriented, as if I'd dug up my old NES Ultima:Quest of the Avatar game. Farming virtues is the way to be, because being chivalrous and religious are both really important. And...you can't start being chivalrous or religious, you have to virtue farm to get there.
That's the most uninformed comment I've read on this forum. Your application of MMO-gamespeak combined with your distinct lack of understanding and experience with the game makes for a soundbite that's about as useful as a chocolate fireguard. Well done, sir!
Elmoth wrote:Wow. Never thought of playing Pendragon (or Ars magica, for that fact, that has a similar approach) as if it was a computer game.

I hope I never will.
It's unbelievable, isn't it.

Re: First significant TOR game

Posted: Mon Jan 13, 2014 4:49 pm
by Rich H
Mim wrote:@Rich, Beran, are you playing Pendragon 5?

I've read your (Rich's) previous posts about it & you seem to enjoy the game immensely.

Thus, I'm considering purchasing it & seeing if I can tweak some of the characters & plots - not the RAW - for ToR (unless it's too much of a stretch).
First off, don't listen to angelalex242. He really has no idea.

Secondly, apologies to anyone that isn't interested in the following as it's definitely off-topic.

.
.
.

Pendragon's an exceptional game which the designer (Greg Stafford) has worked on all his life and is now on its 5th edition, well 5.1 to be exact. Here are a few key points:

1) The game (at least 5/5.1) is designed and built to play knight PCs. Not wizards, not brigands, etc; just knights. As players you really need to buy into that design premise. Because it's so tightly designed around this, the rules really support and aid that setup. Some groups may have an issue with this but I really like RPGs with strong design goals.

2) If you run the Great Pendragon Campaign (GPC) then your players will create knights during Uther's reign. It then progresses across around 80 years of adventure, war, marriages, magic, death, pestilence, and Glory. This will see the players' knights grow in fame and renown, marry, father sons who will father children of their own. The idea being that such PCs, at the end of the campaign, will be the (great/great-great) grandsons of the players' original characters. It's a game about dynasty and glory and the system is built to support and encourage such elements within play. You talk about not liking the 'romantic' elements of Arthurian legend. That is fine as many of the years of the GPC are lacking all romance! They are brutal, nasty affairs and not for the fainthearted!

3) The system is pretty much the BRP system but d20 based rather than percentile based.

* There are a few attributes built on scores of (usually) between 3 and 18 for PCs.

* Combat Skills (Sword, etc), Skills (Oratory, Heraldry, etc), Personality Traits (Greedy, Brave, Merciful, etc), Passions (Honour, Love, Hate, etc) range, usually, between 1 and 20 but can go higher.

* Characters, as Knights, are measured by a Glory stat which increases over time depending on the PCs actions and achievements.

There's a lot more to the system but those are the basic elements and building blocks that support play.

4) Combat is brutal. The mechanics of it are built around simultaneous attacks where a PC vs NPC(s), roll their applicable weapon skill and the highest roll (under their respective skill rating) wins the day; the other person's attack fails. This make resolution quick and exciting - the result being an extremely immediate and visceral experience. There are just a few rules and guidelines for running combat so a GM needs to apply common sense to how it plays out and will have to come up with consistent rulings over time. It can be quite challenging but the pay-off is well worth it.

5) The way Passions work is truly brilliant. Using them allows the PC to achieve great and famous tasks but if they fail they can lead to bouts of melancholy and even madness (sound familiar at all)?

6) Another awesome element of the rules is the way in which Personality Traits work. They are set up in pairs that oppose each other (eg, Generous and Greedy); their scores added together equal 20. So, a particularly Greedy knight could have Greed at 16 and so their Generous Trait would only be 4. These work exceptionally well. They can be used by the player or GM to aid roleplaying and also to determine interactions. Also, because they scale the same as Passions they can be used in opposition with those... For example, want to see if your PC knight falls into a rage when discussing a peace treaty with a Saxon warlord or see if his Temperance holds sway and lets him maintain control, then roll 2x d20s. One for Hate (Saxon), the other for Temperance. The highest roll (still under his Passion or Personality Trait rating) wins the day. It really is an exceptionally clever and streamlined mechanic.

I could go on (don't get me started about Glory, the Winter Phase, Battles, etc!), and if you want I can chat over PM a bit more about it with you. It is an exceptional game - perhaps one of the best of all time. In actual fact, listing out the above, I do think it is a better RPG than TOR - but I swing between the two. Both are great games. If TOR didn't exist, I'd run a Middle Earth campaign using Pendragon and I honestly think it would do just as good a job, maybe even better.

Hope that all helps, but seriously buy it. Even if you never play it you'll appreciate how such a simply designed system could have such clever uses and application. Greg Stafford is a genius.

EDIT: Mim, I'm now away from home for the week, but when I get back Thu/Fri I'll take a quick look of the scenario books I have to see if there are any that could be used for TOR. It's likely that there are some. Will PM you on this one though.

Re: First significant TOR game

Posted: Mon Jan 13, 2014 5:27 pm
by Dunkelbrink
Rich, Your description just made me insta-buy this rpg! Sounds wonderful.

Magnus

Re: First significant TOR game

Posted: Mon Jan 13, 2014 6:14 pm
by Elmoth
Dunkelbrink wrote:Rich, Your description just made me insta-buy this rpg! Sounds wonderful.
Magnus
Best decision of your week, probably. It is a great game.

Re: First significant TOR game

Posted: Tue Jan 14, 2014 12:11 am
by Rich H
Dunkelbrink wrote:Rich, Your description just made me insta-buy this rpg! Sounds wonderful.

Magnus
Excellent, glad I could help. It is an excellent game and is expanded upon with some great additional supplements - eg, Book of Battle, Book of the Manor, etc. For me, these are required as much as the GPC is as they really improve the game. You can play with the basic rulebook perfectly well but a gaming group would be missing so much if these weren't used.

Re: First significant TOR game

Posted: Sun Jan 26, 2014 1:35 am
by Evening
thewisewizard wrote:..when in [Don't Leave The Path] baldor fell into the steam they just wanted to push belgo into the stream so he would forget about his dad cause they were too afraid to go into the forest after baldor
Image