Over on RPG.net, there's a thread on reimagining the Arthurian myths, focused on Mordred: https://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?789985-Reimagining-Arthurian-mythology-Who-is-Mordred

As I'm counting down the days to starting a new campaign (and _this_ time, we're making it to Camlann), I'm thinking about elements of the campaign, both immediate and long term. Mordred might be the trickiest part. There are going to be a lot of characters that the players don't know, but even with a cursory knowledge of the Arthur story, they'll recognize the eventual big bad of the game. However good Mordred is presented initially, and however hard the players try to divide their knowledge from their knights, in the back of their heads they're going to be thinking "So when is this guy going to betray us?"

Well, glancing through that thread I see "Mordred is a spunky, somewhat dense, uncouth boy girl who just wants her father's love and is willing to kill for it."

Maybe not exactly like that, but, well, with two women in the group, I think we're going with women knights as unusual but accepted. So, looking ahead many years, we have the May Babies, all the sons born around such a date gathered up and put on a boat, then lost at sea (as an aside, I'm not sure I like this being put on Arthur- I like the Arthur King of Time and Space version better http://www.arthurkingoftimeandspace.com/0668.htm ). Horrible and all, but Arthur's reign is secure.

And then the Maid of Orkney shows up, call her Morgain. Lot's last child, determined to follow her brothers as a knight. And perhaps she learns some interesting things about her parentage.

A name change and a gender-swap aren't going to solve everything. But it might be enough to give the players pause when they deal with this knight. Even if we still expect her facing her father at the end of a lance in a final battle.

In our just concluded campaign ( http://nocturnalmediaforum.com/iecarus/forum/showthread.php?2829-Reaching-the-end-of-GPC-after-14-years! ), I deliberately did not wish to portray Mordred as a villain, even though he ended up being on the wrong side of Excalibur (or Ron, if you are a purist). While I am not sure how well the players kept their OOC information out of it, as Orkney faction knights towards the end, sworn to Sir Agravaine, Sir Mordred was an ally, not an enemy. Sure, his high Love (Family) did make him do some dishonorable things, but if you look at the canon, so did Sir Gawaine. My original plan had been to keep the PKs in Britain under Regent Mordred, and see what a good king he would have made; I tried to consistently portray him as intelligent, charming and, for lack of a better word, modern. This of course had him at odds with the more chivalric, traditional mores of Lancelot and Arthur. For instance, I was planning on him gathering the first parliament, including representatives from the big cities, most importantly London, which then explains why the Londoners side with him against Arthur. Abolishing trial by combat and replacing it with trial by jury, and stuff like that, which I would expect would have garnered him some sympathy points from modern players. :P

I moved the Battles of Joyous Garde to Benoit, and had a rout of Arthur's army with Gawaine and Arthur both struck down during the battle, leading to rumors that they were dead. Mordred, appointed regent by Arthur and the obvious heir with the death of his older brothers, claimed the crown as his right, and set to prepare the kingdom for the expected counter-invasion by Lancelot to save Guinever. This Mordred harbored no tender feelings about Guinever and instead had her executed for treason, to rob Lancelot of his victory, so to speak. Desperate for troops (as Arthur and Gawaine had taken most knights to Benoit after Lancelot), he allied with King Brian and the Saxons. When Arthur and Gawaine heard rumors of this usurpation, they set sail back to Logres, but were attacked on the beaches deliberately by King Brian's troops, who of course had an incentive to kill Arthur and Gawaine and keep Mordred on the throne. With Gawaine dying of his wounds, Arthur continued to Camlann (which, in my version, was a crooked bank between Camelot and Hantonne, as I could not see how this 'misunderstanding' would hold all the way to Cornish border). There Mordred tried to explain to Arthur that it was all a mistake, that he thought them both dead and that the invasion was by Lancelot's army, with Arthur's banner as a ruse. However, when King Brian's deliberate attack on Gawaine and Gawaine's subsequent death was revealed, Mordred's Love (Family) took over, and he drew his sword, to smite the traitorous King Brian, shouting "You snake!". Alas, with both sides keyed to any sign of treachery, this was construed as a signal to start the battle...

I am not sure how I will deal with Mordred in the second campaign I have going (the overlap in the players is slight). Oh well, I still have almost 30 game years to make up my mind, before Mordred plays any role in the campaign. Given that most of the players are not that well read in Arthurian tales, I might play it straight.

I am not sure how I will deal with Mordred in the second campaign I have going (the overlap in the players is slight). Oh well, I still have almost 30 game years to make up my mind, before Mordred plays any role in the campaign. Given that most of the players are not that well read in Arthurian tales, I might play it straight.

Yeah, having Sir Agravaine as the PK's lord is going to skew things (I'm always going to wonder what would have happened in my old campaign if the PKs had joined up with Lot- when they first met him, he was certainly a more compelling figure than Uther). And accentuating the positives of Mordred's rule helps keep things from being black & white. The thread I linked to, the first reply points out that Arthur's reign is a fairy tale- and Mordred is the guy who figures out the country needs to prepare for things to get real again.

(and I didn't say previously, but I like how you worked in the sword drawn to strike the snake)

I've got a while before Mordred or even Arthur show up, but having had the whole month to think about it, I have nothing but time to plan. I have at least one player with a great interest in Arthur, the others might not recognize Mordred. So, maybe I'll go straight, maybe I'll throw some curves.

Yeah, having Sir Agravaine as the PK's lord is going to skew things (I'm always going to wonder what would have happened in my old campaign if the PKs had joined up with Lot- when they first met him, he was certainly a more compelling figure than Uther).

Indeed. In the current campaign (506), the PKs are vassals of King Idres of Cornwall, having allied with Cornwall back in 500. This means that they will end up on the winning side in 508, but get smacked around by Arthur in 510-513. Should be interesting.

It might be fun to see if they ally with the De Ganis knights this time around, but who knows? In any case, it will be years away.



And accentuating the positives of Mordred's rule helps keep things from being black & white. The thread I linked to, the first reply points out that Arthur's reign is a fairy tale- and Mordred is the guy who figures out the country needs to prepare for things to get real again.


Yes. Also, there are some darker aspects there, too, as hinted in GPC. Everyone knows that there is something going on between Lancelot and Guinever, but no one can say anything, because Lancelot would kill them in a duel. So how is that justice? That is simply might makes right.



(and I didn't say previously, but I like how you worked in the sword drawn to strike the snake)

Thanks! I am rather happy with the way that worked out. Given that everyone was encased in Gothic plate, a mere, actual snake would not have been enough to make anyone pull a sword, just stomp the darn thing.

I've always wanted to replace Sir Mordred with Sir Mildred and see if the players cotton on to it.