Good to hear it's finally coming out, been waiting on this since it was originally announced.

Is this supposed to be a historical re-enactment game?

Sounds great. All the fun of Pendragon but without relentless Monty Python jokes. It's got me sold.

This isn't understated anymore.  You should be shouting this from the rooftops!

Make sure to keep us up to date.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;942018Is this supposed to be a historical re-enactment game?

No, it's like King Arthur Pendragon but for the legendary Charlemagne and his paladins, taken from the (mostly French and mostly 12th-century) chansons de geste.

Quote from: Ruben;942164No, it's like King Arthur Pendragon but for the legendary Charlemagne and his paladins, taken from the (mostly French and mostly 12th-century) chansons de geste.

I see.  I usually get leery of having a timeline already set up for what happens in the setting, usually means it's a historical fantasy re-enactment game in my experience, and I feel restricted by those, hence my dislike.

This might be my first foray into Pendragon.

It's been a long time coming...

Quote from: Christopher Brady;942172I see.  I usually get leery of having a timeline already set up for what happens in the setting, usually means it's a historical fantasy re-enactment game in my experience, and I feel restricted by those, hence my dislike.

I get this. But my own view is that it isn't that big a deal... and kind of helpful.

The short version is that playing Knights in a timeline like The Great Pendragon Campaign is like playing GIs in a game set in WWII. Yes, the grand details are already mapped out. But in such a game you're focusing on those soldiers, with their choices and actions. And their choices and actions are given more meaning by being set against the backdrop of the grand details that everyone already knows.

Not at all everyone's cup of tea. But I do like it.

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;942187I get this. But my own view is that it isn't that big a deal... and kind of helpful.

The short version is that playing Knights in a timeline like The Great Pendragon Campaign is like playing GIs in a game set in WWII. Yes, the grand details are already mapped out. But in such a game you're focusing on those soldiers, with their choices and actions. And their choices and actions are given more meaning by being set against the backdrop of the grand details that everyone already knows.

Not at all everyone's cup of tea. But I do like it.

My crew, and again, this is MY experience, and MY friends, want to have their choices MEAN something.  And historical re-enactment means no, not in the grand scheme of things.

We prefer backstory and then let us loose into the world.  And if Paladins allows to do that too, then perfect.  But if not, and some games do that, I'll have to pass.

This is an interesting point about historical games. I try to err on the side, in the rare times I do them, to allow PC's change the course of history. While there is certain obvious exhilaration at having your PC's present at major historical events - no doubt. I like allowing them to have fun with it. If possible be intertwined with events without necessarily knowing. Or be the "real reason" why certain things happened as opposed to what history books tell us.

HBO's Rome is a good example of what I shoot for.

Christopher Brady, I suspect King Arthur Pendragon is not a game for you and your friends at all. (I think the Traits and Passions rules would drive you guys nuts.)

For anyone else, a note about the game:

It is not a historical re-enactment game. First, it isn't history. The game at it's core is modeled on Thomas Malory's Le Morte D'Arthur... which is of course fiction.

But second, and more importantly, Le Morte D'Arthur focuses not on Arthur but is a series of separate tales about lives and deaths of the other knights of the land.

In Pendragon the characters are knights inserted into the spaces between those tales. Whole new stories are created as the Players and Referee build out the lives of the PCs, and then, when they die, the children of the PCs, and so on. There are plenty of choices, and lots of decisions to be made. But the main decisions are about the fate of the character himself: what sort of knight will he be before he dies. (For death comes to every knight in Pendragon.)

Having the future history mapped out is good since it provides a template of "what happens if the PCs do nothing." Since PCs always do something it helps you figure out what's going on around them once they change things.

For example if you're writing a history of what would've happened if William the Conqueror had died in 1065 you need to read post conquest history to give your alternate history something to compare itself to.

Rock on! Charlemagne sounds awesome even with no data besides my limited knowledge of history.

If you want a good analogy for how a roleplaying campaign could exist in an historical setting, consider Inglorious Basterds. The setting starts in a version of France some time around D-Day and within a few days one of the PC's is machine gunning Hitler in the face. That would fit perfectly well in a game of Behind Enemy Lines (which I recommend above any WW2 game you happen to be playing!).

Quote from: Larsdangly;942278If you want a good analogy for how a roleplaying campaign could exist in an historical setting, consider Inglorious Basterds. The setting starts in a version of France some time around D-Day and within a few days one of the PC's is machine gunning Hitler in the face. That would fit perfectly well in a game of Behind Enemy Lines (which I recommend above any WW2 game you happen to be playing!).

Yup. And in cases like that a "future history" is very useful even if the PCs scramble it as it gives you a template to work off of.