My group is just starting the Anarchy Period and I saw that Merlin will be re-appearing in the next couple of sessions. Upon seeing that, I KNOW my players are going to ask him about what happened to the infant Arthur, and I'm not quite sure how to respond. What's more, I would like my players to possibly try to seek out Madoc's son, which I think they're unlikely to do if they think they have a shot at finding Arthur instead.

How did some of you others handle this? Has anyone had PK's refuse to do things for Merlin unless he tells them where Arthur is?

How did some of you others handle this? Has anyone had PK's refuse to do things for Merlin unless he tells them where Arthur is?


Never got there myself (long story), but here's how I would GM it:
1) Be cryptic. 'All will be revealed in due time.' 'The time is not ripe for a king.' etc.
2) Appeal to their (residual) loyalty. 'There are many who would kill a defenseless boy. Anonymity is his greatest protection.'
3) If all else fails, lie. 'He is in the court of a great Christian emperor in the east.' 'He is in the court of the Faerie King, who will guard him until he is grown.'

You could also have the answer: That is on a need to know basis and you do not need to know.

You could also use the first idea Morien gave be cryptic (or if I usually call it the Vorlon approach): Answer with short cryptic sentences. Sometimes a simple 'yes' or 'no' or even a 'yes and no' will be enough.

If they want to search for the boy, let them. When their off searching for the boy have their homes raided by Saxons. A plea from the Countess may also help keep them focused on the 'real' problem.

My group is just starting the Anarchy Period and I saw that Merlin will be re-appearing in the next couple of sessions. Upon seeing that, I KNOW my players are going to ask him about what happened to the infant Arthur, and I'm not quite sure how to respond. What's more, I would like my players to possibly try to seek out Madoc's son, which I think they're unlikely to do if they think they have a shot at finding Arthur instead.

How did some of you others handle this? Has anyone had PK's refuse to do things for Merlin unless he tells them where Arthur is?

The Merlin in GPC is not someone to be fooled with
If my players did this then Merlin would simply say, in an angry voice, "You question me? Ill mannered whelp! You are not the men I need."
And leave them.

I'm anticipating a similar problem forthcoming, in that Merlin left some hard feelings with the PKs in the wake of the kidnapping of Arthur. When Merlin starts showing back up again, I was worried that someone would (perhaps foolishly) try to attack him, and the others entirely refuse to help. (Treason trials will do that to you.)

Fortunately for me, a near-TPK has eliminated some of the more opinionated characters, but I'm still a little cautious of how they will react when Merlin (the outlaw) makes his reappearance.

It doesn't help that my version of the GPC tones down blatant magics, so Merlin doesn't have an "I win" button in combat and instead has to resort to political pressure and personal gravitas.

In my game the players are very conflicted about Merlin.

His response in this situation was:

'The King is the Land and the Land is the King. Now the Land will bleed and burn and suffer and not even I can prevent this good knights. The folly of Uther with his appetites and lusts has made it so. The King must be spared these trials for now if he is to learn to be truly worthy of his people so for the now his heritage must be hidden from him and he must be hidden from it. Perhaps in time he will be returned to us, who can say?

For now, remember Sword Lake and the glory of the Sword of Victory. Imagine the blade in a gentler and juster hand and pray that this may come to pass. Until then serve your Lord and defend Britain with all your strength.'

They remained fairly conflicted.

It is now Day 2 of Badon hill and they haven't seen him yet. I thimk they are starting to miss him just a little ;D

We probably shouldn't press Arthur's secret upbringing too much; I think its main purpose is a plot device for the Sword in the Stone. If Arthur grows up at Uther's court with everyone knowing who he is, then he'd simply succeed upon Uther's death without any purpose for a spectacular feat. Therefore, he has to be brought up in secret so that the medieval romancers can incorporate the Sword in the Stone. In Malory, not only does Merlin never explain why he had Arthur raised by Sir Ector, but nobody even presses him on the issue (Ulfius comes close to it in the reunion between Arthur and Igraine, but then the focus shifts to the reunion of mother and son and Merlin's act is dropped). I suspect this is because Merlin can't explain it; it's simply a vehicle to get the story to go in the direction that the writers wanted it to go.

Medieval audiences, with the tradition of boys of noble birth being raised in someone else's household (and Arthur in Ector's household is an exaggerated version of it) probably felt less concerned about this trope than modern audiences did. And it applies to most of the major knights in the story; Lancelot is raised by the Lady of the Lake after Benwick falls to Claudas and King Ban dies, Percival is raised by his mother in secret to keep him from taking part in the feud that killed his father and brothers, and in one Latin romance, Gawain is reared by a wealthy Roman who'd received him (in this version, Gawain was the fruit of a pre-marital congress between Lot and Morgause).

Of course, such an explanation might not work for the players....