[JavaApp]

Hey all,

Since I contributed material to the GPC (Goblin Market, some faerie stuff) it is probably inappropriate to comment directly on the review. What I will attempt to do is provide some text from the Pendragon books themselves, which deal with issues of metaplot, railroading, and the GPC as a campaign resource. I’ll also talk about my experiences as a Pendragon GM. In each case, I offer these not to refute the original review, but as an aid to others who are running or considering running the GPC.

First, from the GPC itself, I quote the following,

This Is Background
This book is not the game, but the stuff behind the game. The real game is the story of the player characters, but they are set against a medieval backdrop that provides all the static parts of the world: castles, armor, tapestries of heroes surrounding the feast hall, and so on.

Upon that is the Great Pendragon Campaign, which is the movement of legend towards its destiny. Player characters should do what they wish, and your campaign may take an unlikely turn (“Hey, great! You just unhorsed Lancelot!”) or two (“What, you killed Mordred?”)

The GPC is what goes on while the player knights are living their lives. There, where the player characters are living their lives in the midst of the fantastic Arthurian world, is the real game. (Pg. 6)

There are actually two antecedents to the GPC in previous editions, the Pendragon Companion for First edition, and the Boy King for Third.

This quote is from the Pendragon Companion,

Changing History
You should strive to include well-known Arthurian characters in your campaign.
Their presence lends authority and authenticity. However, their inclusion always threatens the worst. For instance, what if Lancelot himself is jousting and happens to roll a 1, while the player-character rolls a critical success. What should the gamemaster do? Here are some suggestions:

You can fudge. “Well, a blow like that would have killed any normal man twice over, but not the staunch Sir Lancelot!”

You can invoke a deus ex machina. “A woman cries out from the crowd and rushes forward. Everyone gets a recognition roll - it is the Lady of the Lake. She pulls the truncheon from Lancelot’s body, pours a salve over the wound, and kisses him gently on the lips. He wakes, slightly dazed.”

How about surprise? “The dead knight’s helmet is pulled off, make a Recognize roll - made it? You realize this isn’t Lancelot! Someone else is wearing his armor!”

Or do nothing. Change history. “The great Sir Lancelot, once judged the best of knights, is dead.” (And I pity the killer - both Lancelot’s kin and Guenever would surely avenge even an accidental death.)

Most characters are dispensable anyway. Only the death of one of the three main characters would extensively change the campaign plot. Changing history will require some forethought, but nothing requires you to follow the campaign to its predestined end. You may decide to throw predestination to the wind, let any player-character become Guenever’s lover, and maybe even allow someone else to become Pendragon.

This quote is from The Boy King,

This supplement provides guidelines to run a year-by-year Pendragon campaign that allows each player to establish a dynasty of knights whose family story coincides with King Arthur’s. Through play they help or hinder the High King establish his dream realm.

and

The Epic Tapestry
Your task, as gamemaster, is to weave an epic. To help inspire you to the task we have included here part of a fabulous Arthurian artifact called the Beaune Tapestry which depicts many of the events in Arthur’s reign. Your task as gamemaster is to create a similar history, but in memory rather than on cloth. Also, the main characters of your epic are the player knights, not
King Arthur. Your version of this tapestry will have the figures in the foreground.

Like the designers who planned the tapestry, you also have a wide choice of many rich materials, and you can decide what to emphasize. Look upon the game as a set of tools: use the right one when you need it, and ignore those which you don‘t like. This book, by comparison, is full of materials to use.

and

When to Use it
The chronology is not intended to be an inflexible list of event in the realm, but rather a guideline. Use it:

When people go to Carnelot or Arthur’s

To introduce new NPCs.

To maintain a flow of background events in the campaign.

To provide adventures.

Some years are of especial interest, and gamemasters are urged to motivate the characters to come to court for those.
For instance, everyone ought to be present when Arthur pulls the sword from the stone (5 10); to witness the start of the Balin story (5 12); and to participate in the major battles, especially Badon (5 18); and King Arthur’s wedding (5 14). Including the player characters in these events will ensure their sense of participation in the reign.

and

Integrating Knights
This chronology has three applications of the Arthurian story to your Pendragon campaign. All relate to its use with player-knights.

As Spectators: For the player-knights as spectators, this chronology marks the passage of time. One-time events pass: Arthur marries Guenever, the Dolorous Stroke is struck, Lancelot first comes to court, and so on. You should remind players that this new hero is so-and-so’s son, or grandson. Remind them that this murder is the result of such-and so’s feud. Sometimes they will watch some famous adventure begin, and a year or two later hear of the result.

As Participants: The player-characters are affected by some events along with everyone else. They should certainly participate in major wars, their lord’s wars, major tournaments, and events such as searching for the queen. Many adventures should be offered as voluntary: the search for Merlin, several searches for Lancelot, the hunt for the Troit Boar, and the Grail Quest (except for Round Table knights, for whom this quest is mandatory).

Your job as gamemaster is to put the player-characters into a story as replacements. Making up new plots is both taxing and tedious. You should do what all the medieval storytellers did: retell an old tale with new heroes. Insert player-characters into established tales. Using this method, character- knights could replace any of the knights on (for instance) the Adventure of the Hart, Brachet, and Lady (year 514, Malory In, 5-15); or any of the knights of the Triple Quest (year 521, Malory IV, 16-28).

Replacement: Retell the same story with your own heroes, in a different place, with different non-player-characters. Medieval storytellers used this method extensively. Three different stories are told about Guenever ‘s kidnapping. Three good stories use the same plot and motif: Gareth Beaumains, Alisander le Orphelin, and La Cote Male Taile are all unknown new knights who accept their maiden quest from a sharp-tongued young woman.

While I can’t remember the source of the following quote, it’s one of my favorites, which I try to take to heart as much as possible,

Expect that fully 40-60% of the adventures that you players will engage in will be on the spur of a moment, or arise from consequences that you had not expected. (paraphrase)

In terms of a chronology or metaplot, I think we call all agree that the GPC is meant to be used as a series of events that the players or GMs can choose to participate in or not. If the players do not choose to participate, then the chronology can be either ignored by the players or altered by the GM with little or no effect on the campaign. There is plenty to do in Arthurian Britain that does not include Arthur or the grand chronology of Arthurian figures and events.

As for the nature of the scenarios and railroading, it is true that the first block of scenarios in the GPC does place the characters in a precarious position of being manipulated and scapegoated by both Uther and Merlin. When I was done running these scenarios, the PC knights wanted to wash their hands clean of both of them. Indeed, it is an open question whether or not PCs, when placed in such a situation, would be well–disposed toward Arthur when he appears. Greg’s players in his own home campaign were not, as can be found in the blog of their campaign.

As for myself, having run three campaigns in the past, I can honestly say that my players seem to have been extremely happy, and consider Pendragon to be among my most successful of campaigns run. We look forward to continuing it in the near future. Sometimes, when they are on the short end of the stick, they occasionally grumble, but frankly they complain less in Pendragon games then other campaigns I have run in the past.

When I wrote Goblin Market, a woman who playtested it described it as the worst Pendragon scenario she had ever seen. It was too dangerous, and there was no way for the players to easily come out with the optimum result. I agreed, but did not change the scenario. I expected that some players would die or be condemned to fates worse than death. In Pendragon, that’s OK and even fun, if you have the willingness to see a character as a tool for your participation in a tragic story, rather than a typical tale of heroic fantasy where the hero always wins. Tragic circumstances can certainly seem like railroading, because there is no escape from them. The trick is to embrace those circumstances rather than trying to avoid them.

From what I can tell of the original review and the author’s responses, he is using the GPC in exactly the right way; altering elements which don’t appeal to him, and making adjustments based on the needs of his players and the campaign. The GPC is most assuredly not an Adventure Path, or even the normal sort of campaign supplement that one might see on the shelf, which is totally open-ended. It is in fact what Greg claims it to be; a resource for running an Arthurian campaign. I am sorry that the reviewer did not think it worth the purchase, and I can only hope that he finds material, as his campaign continues, which might justify his expense.