Agents of Cheliax Abroad (Inactive)

Game Master Molech

Expanding Cheliax: Infiltrating, Manipulating, Corrupting, and Subverting for The Empire of Devils


251 to 300 of 1,298 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

Archaeologist Bard 8 HP 64/64| AC 23| T 17| FF 16| Fort +7| Ref +15| Will +10| Init +8 Perc +17 | Concentration +13| AL 7/8 L1 6/6 L2 5/5 L3 3/3

We could even hide the papers we found, and make the carriage look rummaged through. Then blame a sneak attack by the Bell Flower network on his capture.

We can then wrap this into telling them that we had previously repelled an attack by the BF network, where they freed the slaves and made an attempt on Phandros but didn't succeed. This would help confuse stuff enough so that when our 'servants' eventually let slip about the attack on the way here we can just pass it off as 'it really happened, but not quite that way'.

Any additions to the above?


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

A bit.

We say that Phandros was injured in the first attack, badly, but we healed him. Then later the night of the attack our watch, say you Alfred, thought he heard something and woke the rest of us. But there was nothing. In retrospect, perhaps it was some agents acting invisibly or very stealthily. But we are really not sure.

that is about as good as I can come up with.


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

I was going to 'fix' the lie by just telling the baroness that he was assassinated, and if Mog questions why I didn't tell him, I would say such info was for the baroness only.


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

I think that is a much better idea Magnius. If we revert to telling the truth the lie won't be discovered.


Archaeologist Bard 8 HP 64/64| AC 23| T 17| FF 16| Fort +7| Ref +15| Will +10| Init +8 Perc +17 | Concentration +13| AL 7/8 L1 6/6 L2 5/5 L3 3/3

I like that idea better too.


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

And I am pretty sure you have the best diplomacy Magnius, so it's up to you. :)

Be prepared for tears from his betrothed.


Yaos wrote:
Be prepared for tears from his betrothed.

.

Interestingly enough, his betrothed is not at the Castle front door waiting for him the way his future mother-in-law to-be is. One wonders where Baroness Stella Spartaco is. Afterall, her father the Viscount is here; he escorted you. Obviously Count Vocaturo and his wife Olivia Spartaco are here. ....Is young Stella Spartaco here at the castle, watching from a window? Or perhaps waiting in Barbazu Hall with her Uncle the Count? Could she actually be at her own small keep in Varna, having not even come to meet Francesco Phandros?


Archaeologist Bard 8 HP 64/64| AC 23| T 17| FF 16| Fort +7| Ref +15| Will +10| Init +8 Perc +17 | Concentration +13| AL 7/8 L1 6/6 L2 5/5 L3 3/3

I figure asking them for a private audience then telling them there as a "we wanted you to know first" will work.


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

Well, I wasn't planning on telling the Viscount at all originally, but that's because I didn't realize he was the dad of the bride to be. I seem to have gotten him confused with somebody else(I thought he was her uncle or something).


You can always have referenced the "Campaign Info" page for clarification regarding who's who and where's where in Gheradescci County. At least, the info that's been available since the beginning of the campaign.

But it also makes sense that you guys wouldn't have a complete picture of the who's who and where's where in Gheradescci County.

I see no issue with Magnius not realizing or being confused on who Baroness Stella Spartaco's father is.


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

Ok, I see my confusion OOC, Stella is the niece of the count. Also, I don't see anywhere in the campaign info that says Mog is her father, just that he's Vocaturo's older brother, but that doesn't mean there isn't another brother who is Stella's dad.

Anyways, I think I'm good now, lol.


You're right, there is nothing in the intro that says Mogranzini and Carnacella are Stella's parents. There is only that the Count chose his niece and that the the Viscount is the Count's older brother. There was no syllogism you could have logically used to know that Viscount Mogranzini was Stealla's father just by reading the campaign info. ....That being said, Mogranzini and Vocaturo are the only siblings mentioned in House Spartaco. So,....

.

In retrospect I had wondered if there would be confusion because Countess-Consort Olivia Spartaco is a niece of Archduke Kettermaul Charthagnion and Baroness Stella Spartaco is the niece of Count Vocaturo Spartaco. But I figured if I kept typing the names out over-and-over it would eventually wear you down and you'd get familiar with them.

Of course, Kettermaul Charthagnion is not one of my characters; he's published That's why just a day or so ago I misspelled his name, 'Cattermaul' -- or something. Oops.


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

Yea, the two niece thing is also slightly confusing, but I think the more we see the characters, and interact with them, the easier it will be to remember/figure out which is who.


I think now may be a good time for me to add another blurb in Campaign Info -- one for the Longmarch Archduchy. It will not be comprehensive. But it'll have a good amount of stuff we've already been exposed to and may help, now that we're getting into Chelaxian feudal lords and Houses.

I'll put some stuff up quickly from memory, then, when I have my published material in front of me, I'll add the bits I can't remember here at work.


As our campaign continues to develop, and I'm seeing more and more the differences between PbP and over-the-table D&D, one aspect seems to be a monkeywrench every time.

In my various home games through the decades we've always talked out-of-game about how we were going to ask a certain question or how we'd answer this or that NPC -- how we'd roleplay a tense or critical encounter.

Then the PCs would attempt it.

In PbP, it seems as though we've lost that a bit. My NPC asks a delicate question or the roleplaying encounter is tense or critical and, because we're not all sitting around the gaming table, we're not throwing out ideas, contradictions, suggestions, counterpoints and amended ideas.

Instead the game slows down a bit (I'm already a pretty slow DM! Sorry.) while -- I assume -- individuals spend time either considering a possible answer or gambit, and then hesitate to post it for fear of stepping on another PC's idea, or just wait for one of the other PCs to go for it. And since we have only three PCs....

I'd like to posit an idea.

What if I double-post, in Discussion, the critical roleplaying encounter and you three can discuss, out-of-game, how you want to handle it. Then, when you're ready -- or if it's taking too long for consensus and everyone just says 'hell with it let's go' -- we jump back to Gameplay.

In the current situation where Count Vocaturo Spartaco has just asked a couple questions -- in a critical moment of the entire campaign -- you three can discuss how you want to approach it, everyone giving their two copper pieces to the conversation.

In my opinion, half of this is NOT metagaming: Your PCs spend their entire time together talking and getting to know each others' non-verbal clues, coming up with contingency plans and adventuring-savvy together every day. It makes no sense that you wouldn't have spent time over the last two days in Gheradescci County -- and even the few days prior to that in wilderness Cheliax -- talking through various possible gambits and situations and hypotheticals in preparation for this meeting that you knew was coming.

The other half is metagaming. And that's okay. We have three Players who joined this campaign because LE intrigue and manipulation and roleplay sounded fun, as opposed to a more hack-and-slash game. Each PC should be given equal time sounding off on ideas, whether the PC has an enormous Bluff & Diplomacy or not -- whether the PC should or should not be the one speaking in a given situation. In other words, just because PC "A" is the most appropriate choice to be speaking in a specific encounter to the NPCs doesn't mean the other Players should stay out of the game. Everyone should pitch in with ideas and counterarguments, and then see who has the best plan.

What do you guys think?

If I double-post Count Vocaturo's question here in Discussion do you agree that talking out-of-game about your possible response will help the game?


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

I can agree to this.

I'm trying not to hog all the 'face' scenes(since my skills are so high), which will probably be a lot of them, and give the others a chance to talk and shine. That's why I kept my pronouncement about the assassination simple. It would then easily open up reactions from the NPCs(and it did), which we could then all interact with.

EDIT: That reminds, since this is such a skill heavy game(though obviously we don't always need to roll them, and we've discussed and agreed that not everything can be handled via a roll), how do you feel about allowing a special 'crit on a skill check' house rule? This would only be for a natural 20.

Some GMs do, some don't. In another game here on the boards, I rolled a natural 20 on a Knowledge check, and the GM gave me additional, pretty much guaranteed info, as opposed to what had been more or less rumors(albeit semi substantiated ones) from the initial DC check.


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

I think having a discussion about major interactions is a great idea, then the party face can actually say it.

Yaos was deliberately leaving the speech to the face here anyway. Because a huge bluff, diplomacy or both was desperately needed.

Generally discussing the way a discussion will go is unrealistic to a degree. It is realistic if it goes the way anticipated, but when unexpected things come up, really a lot of the time, people have to think on their feet w/o an opportunity to talk it over alone. This is not half as unrealistic as combat, where PCs co-ordinate optimally over split second decisions. It is as unrealistic as fairies, dragons and magic and makes a better game.

On the current discussion, I suggest telling them exactly the truth, with the slight change that the Bellflower Agents killed Phandros despite our best efforts to stop them. And I think we should have our real serious combat not happen and those of Phandros's retinue who attacked us and we killed be killed by the BAs in one huge combat.

Specifically the BAs attacked by surprise from invisibility and took out most of Phandros's spellcaster followers before they could do anything and hammered Yaos as well, who survived by going invisible, hiding under a wagon [100% true so far] and then started conjuring things which played a big part in driving off the BAs. that last is what I had planned if we were not able to make peace. The BAs also went straight for Phandros and we think he was killed early in the combat and his body was gone.

Incidentally, this sort of thing was why Yaos wanted to massacre the servants. It wasn't because she is a mad psycho killer, she isn't, but it rules out anyone finding out anything from witnesses. It does not help if they use spells like commune though.

Yaos won't harm anyone w/o a reason or kill people over trivial slights. You could know her socially and she would seem, even be, normal, cultured and friendly. She is unscrupulous, ambitious and totally ruthless, but it isn't at all obvious.


Magnius wrote:
....a special 'crit on a skill check' house rule....

.

I will think about it for this campaign.

I do not allow it in my Homegames (which are very similar in design to this one) but certainly see your point about one of my original concerns-- 'not everything can be handled on a roll.'

Here are my first thoughts:

I would likely not allow it for Knowledge Skills because there are so many Houserules that make designing a PC with great Knowledge Skills easy (such as combining them like Unchained and "Local" is always a Class Skill). That's not to say I can't be convinced. Make your case.

I'm more likely to allow it for Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate and Sense Motive. This game almost screams for that.

But I'm concerned that if it happens during an encounter with a very high level NPC, it will break my own verisimilitude. Let's say you guys are talking to Gorthoklek & Queen Abrogail and for whatever reason you have to roll a Bluff. A nat 20 here may make me pause.

But then again, THAT'S FUN!

How about this, for the four mentioned Skills a nat 20 is treated like a crit in that it does, um, 'double damage', but isn't necessarily an 'auto success' like a Saving Throw. A PC gets a good bump like a double damage but not an automatic victory like a Save.
....So an initial nat 20 on your first Diplomacy to Archduke Kettermaul Charthagnion, or Bluff on the Umbral Court vampire Kholas, or Intimidate on Baron Utilinus of Sargava, would get a 'Double Damage' of sorts, but not, say, enough success to make the Archheathen abdicate and put you in charge of Longmarch, or convince Kholas that you should rule Nisroch instead of the Umbral Court, or make the custodian of Sargava flee into hiding somewhere in the Realm of the Mammoth Lords never to be seen again. At least -- you'll have to do quite a bit of roleplay and successful manipulation and such leading up to those encounters, then make the Skill check for them to succeed that way.
....You (hopefully) will have eventually accomplished enough in Rahadoum to attempt one last Diplomacy or Bluff or Intimidate to make Malduoni acknowledge that Asmodeus as divine ruler of Rahadoum is a good idea -- but not on your first visit and first meeting; I don't care how many nat 20s you get.

Then all we have to do is figure out two things: How to make your Bluff Vorpal! And what to do on a nat 1.

.... I think Linguistics could be added to the four interaction Skills as well for things such as forgeries and cracking codes.


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

I am fairly agnostic on the crits for social skills idea.

But I can see the sense of the limits you mention DM Ray.

Natural 20's occur 5% of times a d20 is rolled and social skills are rolled quite often. So even if it is an exceptional success it is a long, long way from a once in a lifetime event.

Even if your diplomacy skill is at an incredibly high number and you roll a natural 20 you are not going to convince Azmodeus to abdicate and install you as the monarch of hell in his stead.

One approach that seems sensible is something along the lines that a social critical has a diminished effect if the target's hit die, or CR is higher than the PCs level. And none at all if it exceeds character level by 3 or more.


Archaeologist Bard 8 HP 64/64| AC 23| T 17| FF 16| Fort +7| Ref +15| Will +10| Init +8 Perc +17 | Concentration +13| AL 7/8 L1 6/6 L2 5/5 L3 3/3

For important stuff like this I neither have the highest diplomacy or the social standing really to interact with the titled nobility. In this instance I am specifically acting as a high ranking servant of Yaos. I will try to offer more in the discussion page though.

As for skill crits, I do not have a strong opinion either way.


Count Vocaturo Spartaco asks, "Francesco Phandros was assassinated the other day?! You were there? ....This was on my land?"

.

How shall you respond?....


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

Pair of questions, for my fellow players:

1) Should I continue to be the face, for most of the nobility interactions(including this one) from here on out?

2) Is Yaos above suggestion more or less what we want to tell them? Ie, pretty much the truth, tailored ever so slightly to our favor?

Note, we were not asked 'who' assassinated Phandros.

Ray,

May I make a sense motive check on the Ladies? Or do you only allow them if you have a skill spoiler?


You can make a Sense Motive check for Countess Olivia Spartaco for her sudden excusing herself from the gathering, yes. Yaos looked to her as she left but missed any emotion on the Countess' facade. (I don't think that Carnacella has done anything in the last few moments of Gamelay.)


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

Just that she was contemplating the news and it's political implications/ramifications. Couldn't remember if there was anything beyond that, hence my asking for both.


Archaeologist Bard 8 HP 64/64| AC 23| T 17| FF 16| Fort +7| Ref +15| Will +10| Init +8 Perc +17 | Concentration +13| AL 7/8 L1 6/6 L2 5/5 L3 3/3

1 - In my opinion yes. There will probably be plenty of time for me to act as face in situations where Magnius isn't or potentially shouldn't be. And Yaos, while not having a poor diplomacy, still has a fairly low modifier

2 - Also yes, the closer to the truth the better in my opinon


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

1 Yep. It is odd the character with a 26 cha has a relatively low diplomacy. But good we have PCs with more.

2 Yes, I agree with myself. :) Who assassinated Phandros may well be the next question.


And when you're ready to go forward, post in Gameplay.


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

At a wrestling show all day, so will post either late tonight or tomorrow.


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

I see no reason to give more information than is strictly required currently. We have our story, so we're good there.

Edit:Also, I checked over gameplay to be sure I had events correct.

We were attacked by Phandros' retinue, and merely defended ourselves. Tis tragic they died, but they were clearly giving no quarter so none was returned.

And, Phandros was basically assassinated, we just opted to not save his useless life.

So, our story is more or less true.


Count Vocaturo asks, "You received invitations to my niece's wedding; the Countess invited you and you came with young Francesco?"


Archaeologist Bard 8 HP 64/64| AC 23| T 17| FF 16| Fort +7| Ref +15| Will +10| Init +8 Perc +17 | Concentration +13| AL 7/8 L1 6/6 L2 5/5 L3 3/3

I would just go with we were following some Bellflower agents that planned to assassinate Phandros. To best do this we contacted Phandros directly and travelled with him. Due to a previous encounter his retainers were dead so when the Bellflower assassination attempt happened the three of us were not enough to defend him. They released the slaves, killed Phandros and took his body and left.

Basically, more of the truth. I would probably also save time to simply tell the whole story to save the trouble of the fishing questions and seem less like we have something to hide.


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

I think Magnius's suggestion is easier to get away with. It is closer to the truth, which helps.

I would add that we were attacked by Phaedros's retinue without Phandros's knowledge, which again is true. And we say that Phandros was killed by the Bellflower Agents before we had any opportunity to save him. This may well be what Magnius had in mind anyway.

It is not past argument, Alfred's idea also has merit. But that is what I think we should say.

Grand Lodge

Paizo has just published the PaizoCon Events schedule so the next several days I'm going to be using all my D&D free time perusing the Events and finding how to maximize my PaizoCon experience.

I will be ready to get back to our PbP by Monday or Tuesday.


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

Have fun!


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

We need a reason to have joined the caravan, so I think including our uncovering of the Bellflower ambush(which, I also believe is a true event) is necessary to explain why we were there in the first place.


I concur Magnius.


Archaeologist Bard 8 HP 64/64| AC 23| T 17| FF 16| Fort +7| Ref +15| Will +10| Init +8 Perc +17 | Concentration +13| AL 7/8 L1 6/6 L2 5/5 L3 3/3

I agree as well


Archaeologist Bard 8 HP 64/64| AC 23| T 17| FF 16| Fort +7| Ref +15| Will +10| Init +8 Perc +17 | Concentration +13| AL 7/8 L1 6/6 L2 5/5 L3 3/3

I am going to move this along


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

Sorry guys, tween being sick lately, and a very busy weekend, I completely forgot to post here.

Thanks for picking up my slack Alfred :)


Sorry about such a long delay guys.

As you know from my last post I'm getting ready for PaizoCon and have been spending all my free time going through PaizoCon Threads, perusing and picking events for the con, preparing for the little bit of time in Vegas I'm enjoying the day before PaizoCon, and playing lots of PFS to get some PCs up to "fun" levels before PaizoCon.

I've put my three PbP campaigns all the way on the back burner.

I'm hoping to get a bit of a lull in PaizoCon preparation and post a bit here before I fly out west on vacation in two weeks. ....But with the PaizoCon 'special events' Lottery finishing today and 'open events' sign-up scheduled for tomorrow -- not to mention all the horse-trading that will go on once the lottery-picked events are announced -- I'm still on full PaizoCon prep mode.

Please, please don't forget about our campaign. I promise I'm coming back.


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

I understand and I think the other players do as well. You have a life off the internet which is a good thing. I am a bit jealous of your attending PaizoCon.

And I will await your return to this intriguing campaign.

We were talking about chess a while ago. My return to tournament chess after 22 years went better than expected as I came in second in the [very strong] Metro Chess Club Championship B Division.

I managed to go on a 3 game winning streak at the finish, leaving me on 6.5/9 with 5 wins, 1 loss and 3 draws. And I beat the winner and a [rather aged] 2 time WA Champion. I am delighted.

Grand Lodge

It's the day-and-a-half before PaizoCon that I'm spending in Vegas that really hurts. I'm just so preoccupied with the helicopter tour of the Grand Canyon my first few hours in Vegas that it's keeping me from thinking straight.

And I'm doing lots of PFS these last couple weeks.

.

My highest USCF rating (ELO) was 1865. Our ELO ratings should be roughly equivalent to your nation's federation -- at least until you get into Master and GM norms.


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

Enjoy your break Ray. Grand Canyon sounds... grand.

My highest Australian CF rating was 1969, the very first. A result of me trying out tournament chess in the 1984 WA Championship, hoping to gain experience and win a couple of games against the weaker competitors.

I wound up scoring 51/2 out of 9 and not playing any of the weakest competitors. I was rather better than anyone thought, incl myself, but also had a dream tournament.

True ACF and USCF ratings should be more or less the same. But within Australia, the same player will be rated around 150 points higher in Brisbane than Perth.

My impression from 30 years ago was the same player would be rated around 100 points higher still in the US. But that was 30 years ago and based on a small no of games, maybe just 2, so don't take any notice of it. I don't think it is reliable myself.

If we ever meet in person we can play chess and RPGs and discuss poetry and literature. And if I interpret some of your GM posts you share my interest in good food as well. I just don't watch TV shows about it.


Archaeologist Bard 8 HP 64/64| AC 23| T 17| FF 16| Fort +7| Ref +15| Will +10| Init +8 Perc +17 | Concentration +13| AL 7/8 L1 6/6 L2 5/5 L3 3/3

I will be unavailable from June 3 to 11 due to racing in a mini baja competition. I will try to check in from time to time but don't expect much from me.


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

Well, there is not a lot happening just at the moment.

What is a mini baja? And do you have to be a halfling to use one?

In any event have fun.


Archaeologist Bard 8 HP 64/64| AC 23| T 17| FF 16| Fort +7| Ref +15| Will +10| Init +8 Perc +17 | Concentration +13| AL 7/8 L1 6/6 L2 5/5 L3 3/3

You just about need to be a halfling for it to be comfortable. I'm 5' 6" and its pretty tight in there for driving. One of the team members is about 6' 4" and his knees are up around his chest basically when he sits in it.

Here's a link to the teams page Mini Baja

The entire thing except the engine is design by the university team, and we build it as well. Most of the tube bending and welding is done by trades people to make sure its safe, but we tack it all together first and assemble it.


PaizoCon was GREAT!

I played in two James Jacobs' games, one Greg Vaughan game and one Todd Stewart game. Plus I got to meet lots of folks from The Boards and at the banquet sat at Wolfgang Baur's table.

Now I'm back and ready to get back to normalcy. (It has been freakishly busy at work the last couple days trying to catch up after being out a week!)

I'm going to send out a PM to everyone letting them know I can resume asap. I hope you guys are all interested in continuing.

I see Alfred Ensbridge is out for another week; we can start when we're all ready.

And for now we can just catch up!


Male Human Investigator 3/Inquisitor 5

Definitely still here, ready to conquer the world for Her Infernal Majesty!!


Female Half Elf Master Summoner 9 HP 65 Max 90 (9d8 + 18) Defence AC23 Touch 16 Flat Footed 18 Fort +7, Ref +10, Will +9 (+11 vs. charm and compulsion); +2 vs. enchantments Immune sleep Summoner Spells Lvl 1 7/7Lvl 2 56/6 Lvl 3 5/5 Summoning Master SLA 13/13

Me too. I have been awaiting the campaign resuming eagerly. Glad you had fun at PaizoCon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, played in both of James Jacobs' games -- plus a game with Todd Stewart and another with Greg Vaughan!

Today I have to prep for tonight's homegame. I remember we're in Kaer Maga but I've got to go through my notes to see what I'm suppose to do to my unsuspecting PCs (We've been on a two-week break.). And of course I'm watching the Champions' League Final later today before my game.

Probably Sunday evening when my Taldor-game is done I'll get back here and do a remind-myself-what's-going-on post. Or two.

Alfred Ensbridge is on vacation for a good week so I don't want to really go headlong into the game. That would be pretty raw: my taking off for a vacation and then resuming when someone else wants to do the same.

But we can still go over lots of stuff. It may be a great time to develop your PCs.

- - - -

I'm going to start a Thread in the Adventure Path forums about the new Taldor AP starting in February. I got some spoilers at one of the seminars. Keep an eye out if you're interested.

251 to 300 of 1,298 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Online Campaigns / Play-by-Post Discussion / Agents of Cheliax Abroad Discussion All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.