I’m playing Pendragon!

[DrunkonDuty]

So jealous! Have fun!

 

[Stormonu]

Hope you have more luck than I did. I was still in a D&D mentality when we tried it (back in the 90s?). It lasted one session.

As my brother said, "I will. never. play. this. game. again."

Which makes me sad as I've learned so much about non-hack'n'slash games since then and it's a really interesting game to me.

 

[Cruentus]

@Old Fezziwig Thanks for the write-up and explanation. I guess I was just getting too hung up on how often it 'might' get called on. I totally understand if the player wants to use it to either guide behavior, or is generally ambivalent, it can push the character one way or the other (and not always in a good way!).

What I wanted to try to avoid was myself calling for tests of Traits frequently, thinking that every time a situation came up where someone could be dishonest, that they roll (or any of the Traits, not just Honest). I imagine if a knight is in a situation where they are asked a question, and the knight's Trait lean toward Honesty, and they say they are going to tell the truth, I then don't have to have them make a check. They can just choose to be honest. I also understand that if a knight has a strong Honest Trait, and they say they are going to lie, THEN I would ask for a test, first against Dishonest, then Honest if necessary.

Is my thinking in the right vein here?

And @Stormonu, I agree, as a 40 year+ DnD player, getting my head around Pendragon, and Alien, and other RPGs that aren't all hack fests, and where hacking is likely to get you killed, has been a lot of fun (and challenging to get my 40 year play group to try).

 

[Staffan]

I'm most familiar with KAP 1e, though I think the rules have stayed relatively stable over the years (more refinements than full revisions), and Traits are used as follows (I'm paraphrasing the examples given in the 1e Player's Book, pp 52-55):

I have some vague memories of playing Pendragon back in the 90s, and at least back then Traits had an additional function as well. Your Knight could come from different cultures, which would likely have different faiths – Christian and Pagan were, I think, the big ones but there may have been others. These faiths/cultures valued different traits, and if your appropriate traits were high enough you would be getting some kind of bonus.

 

[Old Fezziwig]

@Old Fezziwig Thanks for the write-up and explanation. I guess I was just getting too hung up on how often it 'might' get called on. I totally understand if the player wants to use it to either guide behavior, or is generally ambivalent, it can push the character one way or the other (and not always in a good way!).

What I wanted to try to avoid was myself calling for tests of Traits frequently, thinking that every time a situation came up where someone could be dishonest, that they roll (or any of the Traits, not just Honest). I imagine if a knight is in a situation where they are asked a question, and the knight's Trait lean toward Honesty, and they say they are going to tell the truth, I then don't have to have them make a check. They can just choose to be honest. I also understand that if a knight has a strong Honest Trait, and they say they are going to lie, THEN I would ask for a test, first against Dishonest, then Honest if necessary.

Is my thinking in the right vein here?

You're on the right track, though I might complicate it slightly:

(1) There should be times when PC knights can't help themselves and act in accordance with their nature instead of the player's desires. The Matter of Britain is lousy with knights overcome by emotion or impulse. Gawain abandons the Grail Quest early in favor of attending to damsels (ahem). He knows that he should be off looking for the Grail, but he can't help himself. He is who he is at the worst moment.

(2) I think I'd only call for rolls at times where something is approaching a crisis point. Even a really Honest knight has a score in Deceitful (e.g., Honest 17 still has Deceitful 3), so the capacity for lying is there. Unless it's a BFD in the fiction, I wouldn't roll just because they're lying. But if Sir Ambrut (a PC knight) is accosted at Camelot by a furious Agravain wanting to know if Lancelot is in the Queen's chambers, and Ambrut has a Passion related to the Queen, such that he would want to protect her, even though he knows Lancelot is there, then we'd want to roll. It really matters whether he can keep stumm or not! Can he overcome his nature?

I have some vague memories of playing Pendragon back in the 90s, and at least back then Traits had an additional function as well. Your Knight could come from different cultures, which would likely have different faiths – Christian and Pagan were, I think, the big ones but there may have been others. These faiths/cultures valued different traits, and if your appropriate traits were high enough you would be getting some kind of bonus.

Yep, this is right. There are mechanical bonuses for being an exemplar of your faith, e.g. Wotanic characters gain +1d3 to damage in 1e, if the right Traits are high enough.

 

[Arilyn]

I ran Pendragon many years ago. We had a great time. Got as far as the children of first knights becoming knights themselves, which was fun. Also, going through numerous squires, who'd then go on an be knighted was cool. I remember one knight's first squire being well mannered, loyal and an obvious fit to take his own vows. The next one, not so much!

And of course we had the old trope of "I've just discovered my squire is a girl!" She became a very renowned knight and I think one of the players took her over, but not sure.

 

[Mannahnin]

I've been playing in The Great Pendragon Campaign in 5th ed KAP for the past 2, 2.5 years, and Old Fezziwig's explanations of how to use Traits match with how we do it.

Either the players will sometimes do it if we're undecided on our knight's action, or the GM will call for a check if it's a moment of dramatic stress with significant consequences. Or if the scenario or opponent calls for it (like having to pass a check on Valorous to fight a giant, or an Energetic check to maintain watchfulness through an important overnight vigil).

 

[aramis erak]

Cool character sheet! I never really understood Pendragon though.

The trick is that the adventures need to be properly arthurian in tone.
Mechanically...
The way the campaign works, in 4th/5th...
Step 1: Spring Court. (for starting characters, just an infodump.
Step 2: the adventure of the year - GM's or from the campaign adventures as desired
Step 3: (Optional) Perform a solo adventure.
Step 4: (Optional) Winter Court – again, infodump; landholders must deliver tithes.
Step 5: Winter Phase – experience checks, resolve any construction projects and landholds, spouse, child, and horse/dog/hawk survival rolls.

The mechanics:
All Att/Trait/Passion/Skill rolls are 1d20 High-But-Not-Over. Consciousness checks are vs Current HP.
the 5 attributes are mostly used as saves
The Personality Trait Pairs - used as saves and as compels.
The Passions: Roll under to inspire. Can be opposed to compels.
The skills: usually opposed, but not always. Used to do things.
Inspiration: State goal, state skill, state passion, explain it's relevance, roll passion unooopsed - on Crit, double or +10, higher of, success +10 to skill on task; Fail, -5 to everything for a while; fumble, potentially go mad, or go mope. Max one inspiration at a time. If you fail the task, lower the passion and possibly have a madness episode.

The comparison in opposed rolls is highest successful roll; if adjusted skill >20, roll counts as roll+(skill-20), with 20+ being a critical success, no minimum failure chance. highest adjusted roll wins. Double crits are both crit. Melee, jousting: both use opposed rolls.

The compel: The GM states a presumed action and a roll to compel it upon, the player may argue a passion or trait with which to oppose. If the player's trait wins, they get a check in it and avoid the compel. If the trait wins, the player gains an experience check in it. If the player simply acquiesces, they may take the check in it. The most common compel is to hesitate to melee
Step 1: Valor test - If passed, may enter melee. if failed, go to step 2.
Step 2: Cowardly test – on success, flee from the fight. If failed, may go to step 1 next round

The second most common compel in my games has been for night-watch. Pass an energetic or fall asleep; many oppose it with their Loyalty Lord passion.

One option from the mailing lists was to use "Minor Inspiration" on traits - only +5 but still the -5 all on fail. I used to use it, but stopped before the last two campaigns I've run.

 

[aramis erak]

A lustful, energetic, generous and valorous knight. Interesting mix. Always liked the Traits system. Have fun!

Probably a Pagan, too.

 

[Nightfly]

I never really understood Pendragon though.

I don't know much about it, although I'm told it's mightier than Swordragon.