Right now I'm mostly playing D&D, but I'd like to try this game. If there is anyone in the L.A. area interested in running a campaign of this I'd be interested. :)

Hi Paul,

I have been thinking of trying to find a group in the LA area, too. I am residing in Pasadena myself.

I have been GMing Pendragon for a good while now, and actually have a long-distance campaign going with my group that I left behind in the mother country.

Thus, I would rather be playing Pendragon myself rather than GMing it, but I could do the GMing in a pinch.

One complication is that I do not have a car, so I would either need transportation help or the game would need to be at my place in Pasadena.

And we probably would still need a couple of more people to get a group going. :)

Best wishes,
Morien

I woluld be interested in joing the as a player and later running a game. I live in Montrose which about 10 miles from Pasadena.


David Peters

That would make us already three. Not too bad.

I am going to UK next week, but I will be back in late July. And nothing prevents us from starting to plan stuff already via email.

Best wishes,
Morien

I just saw that people are responding to this thread. I am still interested. Furthermore, I usually play in Pasadena at Game Empire. Let's try and make this happen.

Good. I have sent email to you and David, and hope we can hash out schedules and locations together. And of course, we would be willing to welcome other players in the LA area as well. :)

Yes I did get your email and I have just been very busy. Lets start planning on starting a small campaign.

David

Here is something that was sent to me and I am posting here.

David P.



Given my own limitations of time mentioned previously, we are looking a short
campaign maybe 30+-10 sessions. This does pose some problems, campaign-wise.
Allow me to demonstrate:

The GPC starts 485 AD. At 1 session / game-year, we could cover until 515AD or
so. Maybe, in a pinch, to the Battle of Badon. 518 AD. Which is not necessarely
a bad point to end the campaign (I did that in the previous one). But it does
mean that we need to keep in mind that we will see, at maximum, two generations
of knights.

So there are three choices here:
1) Limited campaign: Instead of trying to cover as much as possible, concentrate
more on the formation of the dynasty.
2) The default choice mentioned in the above.
3) Broad-brush campaign: cheerfully jump over 'boring bits' to get to the big
stuff. Here, the focus would be in a decade or so of each generation. For
example:
- 1st Gen (born 460): Will Salisbury stand or fall after the Battle of St.
Albans? 495 - 509 AD.
- 2nd Gen (born 481): The Struggles of the Boy King, 510-518 AD.
- 3rd Gen (born 502): The Roman War and Anglish Rebellion, 525 - 532 AD.
- 4th Gen (born 523): The Romance Period, 540s AD, and the Downfall and Camlann,
late 550s AD.

Another question is if we want to play in Arthur's Britain, or if you'd prefer
historical (the civil war between Matilda and Stephen, or the Plantagenet
squabbles in latter half of 1100s might be fun), or Middle-Earth (either Gondor
or Arnor in their height/decline, or Rohan preceding the War of the Rings)?

Eagerly awaiting for your opinions,
Weli-Matti

Paul expressed a preference for option 1, and David stated he'd prefer KAP as well.

So I think we will be concentrating on the first generation... Not quite sure yet if we want to begin in Uther's time, or start at 495 instead with the hope of getting all the way to Badon (and getting some Arthur time, too)?