Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
Recruitment Play-by-Post Play-by-Post Discussion
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends


DM-All-Stars´ Darkmoon Vale Campaign

Game Master Tim Bürgers

This is a campaign where all players take turns in DMing. We play the Darkmoon Vale-Series Modules so far.


101 to 150 of 211 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Monkeygod wrote:

When I randomized before, I got a Male Half-Elf Bard. Though I did not roll for an archetype.

I've never played a Bard before, and I have a pair of Rangers already, so I think I'll go with the Half-Elf Bard.

AZ, care to pick my archetype for me?

Arcane Duelist, Sandman, Street Performer, Dervish Dancer.

Surprised you did not go archeologist as it works well with the darkmoon vale

4d100 ⇒ (42, 29, 67, 10) = 148 Arcane Duelist, Sandman, *Street Performer, Dervish Dancer

gender: 2d4 ⇒ (4, 2) = 6

End result: Female Half-Elf Bard(Street Performer)


I know nothing of the modules, in fact, these will be the first ones I run or play in.

That said, I wonder if Street Performer would fit. As much I have no problem tryin one, I don't want to be mostly useless...

Shoulda just stuck with my original idea, which was Dervish Dancer...


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Street performer works as well,
you'll need to be a local of Falcon's Hollow, singing for his supper.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
LastNameOnEarth wrote:

I find the randomization idea interesting, but again, I too would only want to do it if everyone was. The characters that result are likely to be less than ideal combinations. If everyone did it, it could be a lot of fun.

...

It is fun, and you get a very interesting party and game.

Even if one or two don't randomise it should be ok.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Time to Randomise my own character

Assault: Fighter/Monk
Skilled: Ninja/Ranger
Divine: Bard/Cleric
Arcane: Sorcerer/Witch

Races: Aasimar,Changeling,Suli,Sylphs

Ass/Skill: 4d100 ⇒ (54, 58, 28, 5) = 145 Fighter/Monk*, Ninja/Ranger
Div/Arc: 4d100 ⇒ (71, 88, 11, 72) = 242 Bard/Cleric* , Sorcerer/Witch

Final: 2d100 ⇒ (80, 53) = 133 Monk

Race1: 2d100 ⇒ (36, 60) = 96 Changeling, Aasimar*
Race2: 2d100 ⇒ (1, 3) = 4 Sylphs, Suli*
Race Final: 2d100 ⇒ (29, 29) = 58 Same results: Tie
Race Final: 2d100 ⇒ (52, 4) = 56 Suli*, Aasimar

Result: Suli Monk.
Please select 4 Archetypes.

-------------------------------------
Drunken Master, Martial Artist, Master of Many Styles, Tetori

Div/Arc: 4d100 ⇒ (98, 40, 19, 35) = 192 Martial Artist, Drunken Master, Tetori, Master of Many Styles

was hoping for Tetori

Gender: 2d4 ⇒ (2, 4) = 6

End Result: a Female Suli Monk(Martial Artist).


Seems like we've got a lot of female characters this game.


Hmmm...Suli and monk don't go together too poorly. Nottoo bad at all.


Is this thing still open for others? Or these things because the whole randomization thing seems to have hijacked the thread a bit :D

Anyway, I'd love to participate in a taking turns at DM'ing. Are you guys all set (hence the randomization thing taking off)?


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Loup Blanc wrote:
Seems like we've got a lot of female characters this game.

I know, it's odd, it should be split near 50/50.

-----------------------------------------------------
For those wishing to know How gender was determined with the method I used;
this system is like human chromosomes: XX = female, XY = male.
simply roll TWO dice and look at even or odd values for each die
if both are even or both are odd gender is female,
if one is even the other is odd gender is male.
-----------------------------------------------------


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Brass Pigeon wrote:

Is this thing still open for others? Or these things because the whole randomization thing seems to have hijacked the thread a bit :D

Anyway, I'd love to participate in a taking turns at DM'ing. Are you guys all set (hence the randomization thing taking off)?

I believe it's still open

some of us are using randomisation to get some interesting characters.

This is my first Suli character.


And is Tim still "in charge" for now?


Azure_Zero wrote:
Loup Blanc wrote:
Seems like we've got a lot of female characters this game.

I know, it's odd, it should be split near 50/50.

-----------------------------------------------------
For those wishing to know How gender was determined with the method I used;
this system is like human chromosomes: XX = female, XY = male.
simply roll TWO dice and look at even or odd values for each die
if both are even or both are odd gender is female,
if one is even the other is odd gender is male.
-----------------------------------------------------

That leads to one of the main fallacies in statistical analysis, the Clustering Illusion. Basically, the "50/50 split" is only guaranteed with statistically large sampling sizes. In any random process, there will be small subsets which tend to have streaks or clusters.


I think Tim, as the OP, is still 'in charge' and he noted he wanted to run the first module. I think there was a note somewhere early in the thread noting recruitment would close Friday 8/24.

Most of the posts, though, have been around random character generation and agreement of base rule sets.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
DM Bigrin wrote:
Azure_Zero wrote:
Loup Blanc wrote:
Seems like we've got a lot of female characters this game.

I know, it's odd, it should be split near 50/50.

-----------------------------------------------------
For those wishing to know How gender was determined with the method I used;
this system is like human chromosomes: XX = female, XY = male.
simply roll TWO dice and look at even or odd values for each die
if both are even or both are odd gender is female,
if one is even the other is odd gender is male.
-----------------------------------------------------
That leads to one of the main fallacies in statistical analysis, the Clustering Illusion. Basically, the "50/50 split" is only guaranteed with statistically large sampling sizes. In any random process, there will be small subsets which tend to have streaks or clusters.

I hope the streak stops.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Thorid Bofack wrote:

I think Tim, as the OP, is still 'in charge' and he noted he wanted to run the first module. I think there was a note somewhere early in the thread noting recruitment would close Friday 8/24.

Most of the posts, though, have been around random character generation and agreement of base rule sets.

The OP is still in charge, I believe.

This recruitment thread might also break into multiple games,
and would prefer it to have standardised character creation rules.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Votes:

Summoners:
Ban(1)
Ok(1)
Base only(1)
Base only or ban(1)
?(2)

Gunslingers:
Ban(3)
Ok(1)
?(2)

Website:
PRD(4)
D20pfsrd(2) Minus any 3PP material.
No preference(1)
?(1)

Stats (20 point buy): This will need separate voting
1) Nothing below 10 before racial mod
2) Nothing below 8 after racial mod
3) min 7 before racial mods, no max - as per the default rules
4) nothing below 7 after racial mods, only one stat at that 7; everything else needs to be 8 or higher after racial mods
5) scores below 7 or above 20 after racial mods
6) 7-18 range BEFORE racial mods.


Thanks Thorid.

[DELETED LONG STORY ABOUT RULES]

Quote:

So how about the following:

Everyone takes care to make a character with a reasonable level of power. Full Stop. No more rules than that is my opinion.

Yes to this!

sources: d20pfsrd
random: (almost) always fun to do, not mandatory though
stats: point-buy 22 is fine (or rolling)
DM hints: I like those too

@Azure: randomize me!
Assault: Barbarian/Cavalier
Skilled: Bard/Rogue
Divine: Cleric/Oracle
Arcane: Witch/Wizard

Races: Elf/Tengu/Hobgolin(with a negative stat adjustment?)/Nagaji


Ok, so here are my Archetypes and racial variant:

Gender: Male/Female* - 2d100 ⇒ (86, 92) = 178

Archetype: Beastmaster, Falconer*, Infiltrator, None 4d100 ⇒ (27, 88, 74, 15) = 204

Racial Heritage: Angel, Azata, Default, Garuda*4d100 ⇒ (45, 26, 24, 90) = 185
Alternate Abilities: 4d100 ⇒ (72, 77, 52, 80) = 281 Fire Resistance 5
Varient Features: 4d100 ⇒ (37, 43, 86, 17) = 183 Feathered Ears - since it fits with Plumekith

Female Garuda (Plumekith) Blooded Aasimar Ranger (Falconer)
This is going to be the party of the Amazons.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Tim Bürgers wrote:

All those rules seem pretty complex to me.

But all your concern shows me one thing:

All of you are reasonable people. Can´t we build on this?

So how about the following:

Everyone takes care to make a character with a reasonable level of power. Full Stop. No more rules than that is my opinion.

If a character seems to break the limits of reason than the starting DM can intervene nevertheless, but on a case-by-case basis.

I hope, this helps stop discussions and starting games.

Everyone's definition of reasonable is different,

therefore you need to set it in stone.

It was agreed earlier that it's 20 point-buy,
but we have yet to finish on the point-buy rules.

Further things that need settling are;
are summoners banned, limited, or OK
are Gunslingers banned, or OK
What website to use as a resource (PRD or d20pfsrd.com).


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Brass Pigeon wrote:


@Azure: randomize me!
Assault: Barbarian/Cavalier
Skilled: Bard/Rogue
Divine: Cleric/Oracle
Arcane: Witch/Wizard

Races: Elf/Tengu/Hobgolin(with a negative stat adjustment? )/Nagaji

Assault: Barbarian/Cavalier

Skilled: Bard/Rogue
Divine: Cleric/Oracle
Arcane: Witch/Wizard

Races: Elf/Tengu/Hobgolin/Nagaji

Ass/Skill: 4d100 ⇒ (29, 10, 74, 56) = 169 Barbarian/Cavalier, Bard*/Rogue
Div/Arc: 4d100 ⇒ (79, 42, 30, 1) = 152 Cleric*/Oracle, Witch/Wizard

Final: 2d100 ⇒ (85, 1) = 86 Bard

Race1: 2d100 ⇒ (21, 2) = 23 Elf*/Tengu
Race2: 2d100 ⇒ (15, 33) = 48 Hobgolin/Nagaji*
Race Final: 2d100 ⇒ (38, 92) = 130 Nagaji/Elf*

Result: Elf Bard
Please select 4 Archetypes.


I've at least got the character concept done, sorry for using such a bland race/class combination, but hopefully it'll be fun despite that.

Name: Vero Inious
Gender: Male
Alignment: Chaotic Good
Race: Human
Class: Rogue
Bio: A former wizard turned rogue, Vero denounced all forms of the arcane arts after using his powers for vile, unjust acts forced upon him by his superiors. Self-loathing and cynical but still fostering a good heart, Vero lumbers on with his life, simply trying to gather enough gold pieces to make it through the day and perhaps, with some luck, get revenge on those that drove him to perform such unspeakable actions.

The bio could use a bit of work, as it's very much full of ideas that were floating around, although, hopefully an apathetic rogue looking for redemption won't be too serious for this campaign.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Having read the darkmoon vale series you could have been an assistant of Sharvaros Vade and be a local of the town which is under the thumb of the lumber consortium.


Azure_Zero wrote:
Tim Bürgers wrote:

All those rules seem pretty complex to me.

But all your concern shows me one thing:

All of you are reasonable people. Can´t we build on this?

So how about the following:

Everyone takes care to make a character with a reasonable level of power. Full Stop. No more rules than that is my opinion.

If a character seems to break the limits of reason than the starting DM can intervene nevertheless, but on a case-by-case basis.

I hope, this helps stop discussions and starting games.

Everyone's definition of reasonable is different,

therefore you need to set it in stone.

It was agreed earlier that it's 20 point-buy,
but we have yet to finish on the point-buy rules.

Further things that need settling are;
are summoners banned, limited, or OK
are Gunslingers banned, or OK
What website to use as a resource (PRD or d20pfsrd.com).

I think the point was that, no, we don't need to set it in stone, or want to. 20 point buy, default rules, all classes open.

Reasonable is pretty universal; if you see a build you think is broken, comment on it. This is what the OP suggested, and I think it works just fine. Otherwise, we'll be knit-picking over the house rules for days. In a rotating GM arrangement, there are going to be far too many cooks in the kitchen to find an exact set everyone can agree on. Therefore, the default rules of the game by far make the most sense.


Azure_Zero wrote:
Aroach1188 wrote:

ill take some randomization

Assault: Monk/Ranger
Skilled: Rogue/Bard
Arcane: Wizard/Witch
Divine: Cleric/Druid
Races: Human, Half Elf, Aasimar, Tiefling

Ass/Skill 4d100 Ranger or Monk, Rogue* or Rogue

Div/Arc 4d100 Cleric or Druid , Witch* or Wizard

Final: 2d100 Rogue

Race1:2d100 Human, Half Elf*
Race2:2d100 Aasimar*, Tiefling
Race: Final2d100 Half-elf

Result: Half-elf Rogue

Please select 4 Archetypes.

Swashbuckler, Knife Master, Pirate, Standard

I vote for no stats below 8. Either website should be fine (No 3PP though) Base summoner only, no ginslinger


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Aroach1188 wrote:
Azure_Zero wrote:

Result: Half-elf Rogue

Please select 4 Archetypes.

Swashbuckler, Knife Master, Pirate, Standard

Archetype: 4d100 ⇒ (86, 87, 87, 28) = 288 Swashbuckler, Knife Master, Pirate, StandardHigh Tied

Archetype: 4d100 ⇒ (57, 62, 52, 33) = 204 Swashbuckler, Knife Master*, Pirate, Standard

was hoping for Tetori

Gender: 2d2 ⇒ (1, 2) = 3

End Result: a Male Half-elf Rogue(Knife Master).


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Votes:

Summoners:
Ban(1)
Ok(1)
Base only(2)
Base only or ban(1)
?(2)

Gunslingers:
Ban(4)
Ok(1)
?(2)

Website:
PRD(4)
D20pfsrd(2) Minus any 3PP material.
No preference(2)
?(1)

Stats (20 point buy): This will need separate voting
1) Nothing below 10 before racial mod
2) *Nothing below 8 after racial mod
3) min 7 before racial mods, no max - as per the default rules
4) *nothing below 7 after racial mods, only one stat at that 7; everything else needs to be 8 or higher after racial mods
5) scores below 7 or above 20 after racial mods
6) 7-18 range BEFORE racial mods.

Out of the point buy rules two have more votes than the others so far
2) *Nothing below 8 after racial mod
and
4) *nothing below 7 after racial mods, only one stat at that 7; everything else needs to be 8 or higher after racial mods


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
LastNameOnEarth wrote:
Azure_Zero wrote:
Tim Bürgers wrote:

All those rules seem pretty complex to me.

But all your concern shows me one thing:

All of you are reasonable people. Can´t we build on this?

So how about the following:

Everyone takes care to make a character with a reasonable level of power. Full Stop. No more rules than that is my opinion.

If a character seems to break the limits of reason than the starting DM can intervene nevertheless, but on a case-by-case basis.

I hope, this helps stop discussions and starting games.

Everyone's definition of reasonable is different,

therefore you need to set it in stone.

It was agreed earlier that it's 20 point-buy,
but we have yet to finish on the point-buy rules.

Further things that need settling are;
are summoners banned, limited, or OK
are Gunslingers banned, or OK
What website to use as a resource (PRD or d20pfsrd.com).

I think the point was that, no, we don't need to set it in stone, or want to. 20 point buy, default rules, all classes open.

Reasonable is pretty universal; if you see a build you think is broken, comment on it. This is what the OP suggested, and I think it works just fine. Otherwise, we'll be knit-picking over the house rules for days. In a rotating GM arrangement, there are going to be far too many cooks in the kitchen to find an exact set everyone can agree on. Therefore, the default rules of the game by far make the most sense.

I think if we all agreed on a standard then their will be no b****ing later.

For me reasonable is
No stat below 8 after racial
Yours is likely
min 7 before racial mods, no max.

So "reasonable" is vague as crap,
if it's defined, no one can complain about broken builds.
and each GM has different standards, hence why there should be a standard.

and judging on the votes so far
Gunslinger is in the Dust bin
Summoner will likely be base only by vote.


What you are suggesting is that we substitute Arbitrary instead of Reasonable; and they are not the same.

In terms of stats, I think it is a better idea just to say, "Low/dump stats will be enforced in game, and will affect your interactions with NPC's and the environment."

Anybody who wants a dump stat will think long and hard before taking one, and have no one to blame if their Str 5 Halfling wizard can't open an iron door by himself.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
LastNameOnEarth wrote:

What you are suggesting is that we substitute Arbitrary instead of Reasonable; and they are not the same.

In terms of stats, I think it is a better idea just to say, "Low/dump stats will be enforced in game, and will affect your interactions with NPC's and the environment."

Anybody who wants a dump stat will think long and hard before taking one, and have no one to blame if their Str 5 Halfling wizard can't open an iron door by himself.

Not every GM does the "Low/dump stats will be enforced in game" gig and that's just passing the problem to the GM and he already has a full plate.

If their Str 5 Halfling wizard can't open an iron door by himself, guess what, he'll have the Str 22 Human Barbarian with 7 WIS do it for him.
and when that barbarian is dominated into attacking the group, the parties best weapon is now the enemies weapon.


As much as I love a good debate, perhaps we should move on and just get characters rolling (onto the boards, not rolling for stats, since we're doing point-buy, I think).

We can always let the OP decide what he wants.


Loup Blanc wrote:

As much as I love a good debate, perhaps we should move on and just get characters rolling (onto the boards, not rolling for stats, since we're doing point-buy, I think).

We can always let the OP decide what he wants.

Agreed. Thorid stats should be all set, just need to work on back story.

Since we're starting in Darkmoon Vale I'm going to change him up a bit from my original idea so he's coming down from Five Kings Mountains and ending up in Falcon's Hollow. Need to browse through the Darkmoon Vale book when I get home.


The OP did already chime in and expressed the opinion that everyone should just make reasonable builds. AZ has expressed the opinion that this is not sufficient.

Azure_Zero wrote:
LastNameOnEarth wrote:

What you are suggesting is that we substitute Arbitrary instead of Reasonable; and they are not the same.

In terms of stats, I think it is a better idea just to say, "Low/dump stats will be enforced in game, and will affect your interactions with NPC's and the environment."

Anybody who wants a dump stat will think long and hard before taking one, and have no one to blame if their Str 5 Halfling wizard can't open an iron door by himself.

Not every GM does the "Low/dump stats will be enforced in game" gig and that's just passing the problem to the GM and he already has a full plate.

If their Str 5 Halfling wizard can't open an iron door by himself, guess what, he'll have the Str 22 Human Barbarian with 7 WIS do it for him.
and when that barbarian is dominated into attacking the group, the parties best weapon is now the enemies weapon.

I am sure a GM can manage the onerous task of figuring out how a STR 5 (or CON 6, or CHA 7, etc.) might present a practical limitation. I doubt after all this talk that anyone will have one anyway.

In the end, regardless of your experiences or preferences, you will be one GM among 12 or so in this game, and as strong as your preferences are, it is... inconsiderate to insist all adapt to your preferences in order to avoid problems that may or may not occur during the one module you will be running. And against the OP's expressed wishes. Though I could be mistaken, I think it is arrogant to assume that a game cannot function for one low level campaign as the writers, developers, and playtesters all concluded would be the best currently possible version.

Look, all bitterness aside, I have a long list of house rules I like to use too. I'm sure about half the people here would think they are really interesting, and the other half wouldn't; that's why I haven't suggested any of them. When there is 12 GM's, it would be unreasonable for me to insist on my version of the game. With that many people, the logical compromise is to play the game by the default rules. With a single GM, the situation is entirely different, and the GM sets the rules; players who don't like them can find another game. Here however, unless there is a unanimous opinion, or at least a clear majority, the default rules should be the Default Rules.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
LastNameOnEarth wrote:

The OP did already chime in and expressed the opinion that everyone should just make reasonable builds. AZ has expressed the opinion that this is not sufficient.

....

I am sure a GM can manage the onerous task of figuring out how a STR 5 (or CON 6, or CHA 7, etc.) might present a practical limitation. I doubt after all this talk that anyone will have one anyway.

In the end, regardless of your experiences or preferences, you will be one GM among 12 or so in this game, and as strong as your preferences are, it is... inconsiderate to insist all adapt to your preferences in order to avoid problems that may or may not occur during the one module you will be running. And against the OP's expressed wishes. Though I could be mistaken, I think it is arrogant to assume that a game cannot function for one low level campaign as the writer's, developers, and playtesters all concluded would be the best currently possible version.

Look, all bitterness aside, I have a long list of house rules I like to use too. I'm sure about half the people here would think they are really interesting, and the other half wouldn't; that's why I haven't suggested any of them. When there is 12 GM's, it would be unreasonable for me to insist on my version of the game. With that many people, the logical compromise is to play the game by the default rules. With a single GM, the situation is entirely different, and the GM sets the rules; players who don't like them can find another game. Here however, unless there is a unanimous opinion, or at least a clear majority, the default rules should be the Default Rules.

I don't mean to sound bitter, but

Again, what is the definition of Reasonable?

I know I am one out of twelve GMs, and that house rules would be out the door.
And I am not insisting on MY version of the game,
because I started and am taking a voting poll to set "the standard" for this game that everyone will get a say on and agree to follow.

and you say we should follow Default Rules, but what are the default rules?
Point me to the source, and I'm willing to bet the default rules are also 15-point buy.


Reasonable is a character that is viewed and not found objectionable by a majority of the people who will be GMing. It does not have to adhere to an exact standard, and it may include low stats. It needs to merely, on the whole, seem like a reasonable character to the majority of concerned parties.

edit: didn't see your last edit until after I'd published.
The default rules are the ones listed in the books, and on the PRD and PFSRD, not including third party content. The point by is determined by the GM (or consensus of GM's in this case). The AP's are balanced for a 15 point buy, but I don't think they demand it. If the group wants a 15 pt buy, I am fine with that. I believe you suggested the 20 pt buy, and it has been carried forward since.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Sorry I'm lawyerish

Then the answer in simple answer with definition is

Of the players in each game,
each character is voted on by his peers of that game, (excluding the player's vote)
and requires over 50% approval.

Example 1: 6 players/game, each character is voted on once by five peers and to be allowed requires a minimum of 3 votes.

But what happens if
Example 2: 5 players/game, each character is voted on once by 4 peers and to be allowed requires majority, but the vote is split 2 vs 2, what happens.


If you want to get that specific, I'd say tie goes to the defender, the PC defending his character (innocent until proven guilty). A majority is required to deem them unreasonable.


I'd say in that case allow the character. In case of tie, player's favor. Don't make them remake a character, just because 2 of the 4 people think their idea is no good.

Edit: ninja'd by 9 seconds! But we're saying the same thing.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Never noticed it before
So default is

PRD wrote:
No score can be reduced below 7 or raised above 18 using this method. See Table: Ability Score Costs for the costs of each score. After all the points are spent, apply any racial modifiers the character might have.

currently the vote is tied between

2) Nothing below 8 after racial mod
and
4) Nothing below 7 after racial mods, only one stat at that 7; everything else needs to be 8 or higher after racial mods


All those character-ideas look so well to me!

Since I don´t like this discussion about the "laws of creation" anyways (though I see the good intention), let me try to move this on. I have compiled a list of characters sorted by game-technical type, as recruitment ends today.

I also made a suggestion of possible groups at the end. I tried to get all people in and nevertheless make each group functional.

Flykiller - Human Monk (Wanderer)
Me - Human Conjurer (Thassilonian)
Loup Blanc - Ifrit Sorceress (Crossblooded: Stormborn and Arcane) OR Urban Barbarian
DM Birgin - Tiefling(Reg) Cleric(merciful healer)
Monkeygod - Half-Elf Bard(Street Performer)
AZ - Suli Monk(Martial Artist)
LastNameOnEarth - Garuda (Plumekith) Blooded Aasimar Ranger (Falconer)
Dognapalm - Human Rogue (and, to my mind, not a bit bland)

This makes for two groups, e.g.:

Flykiller (Monk)
LastNameOnEarth (Ranger)
Monkeygod (Bard)
Me (Conjurer)

The lack of a healer is compensated partly by the bard, maybe just with a wand, and partly by the conjurers summoned minions, who can just die without any real damage done. The Bard´s inspire-ability works well with summoned creatures and the animal companion of the Falconer. Monk and Ranger just have to hold the line for one round until creatures arrive, then both of them fit pretty nicely into the role of damage dealer. Pretty skill-strong: Wizard - Knowledge, Bard - social, Ranger/Monk - Physical.

AZ (Monk)
Dognapalm (Rogue)
DM Birgin (Cleric)
Loup Blanc (Sorcerer or Barbarian, though Sorc would fit better into the group so far)

Very balanced party, if with a Sorcerer. If with the barbarian, party could be quite melee-strong. This would work well with the cleric´s mass-buff-spells like bless, prayer or blessing of fervor. Without the Barbarian, battlefield-control could be quite useful to save the monk from too much melee-damage. The Rogue, as usual, would make for a perfect damage dealer. Skills seem good to: Sorcerer - social, Rogue/Monk - Physical, but a lacks a bit of knowledge perhaps. If the Barbarian is on board, maybe social skills could suffer.

Only my thoughts. But if nobody opposes, I suggest, that we open the gaming-threads now and start with these groups.


Ima have to throw a slight monkeywrench in the works:

I really, really want to play a Dervish Dancer Bard. I can't get the image of a badass female half-elf dancing around the battlefield, kicking ass outta my head.

I hope nobody minds this change, but the DDa Bard is a concept I've wanted to play for a long time now, but never had the right game.


*waves franticly at Tim*

If a group of 5 is ok with you I'd still like to join. I don't mind switching to the 2nd class (cleric) from AZ's results if you feel that fits better with the group than a 2nd bard (I do, but I would allow a 4-bards-party so let's ignore me on that one).


erm *cough* *raises hand* I'm a healer...

If you missed my character stats (I didn't post them in the thread, they're on my profile though) here they are:

THORID BOFACK CR 1/2
Male Dwarf Cleric 1
LG Medium Humanoid (Dwarf)
Init +0; Senses Darkvision; Perception +3
--------------------
DEFENSE
--------------------
AC 16, touch 10, flat-footed 16 (+5 armor, +1 shield)
hp 10 (1d8+1)
Fort +3, Ref +0, Will +5
Defensive Abilities Defensive Training
--------------------
OFFENSE
--------------------
Spd 20 ft.
Melee Light Shield Bash -3 (1d3+1/20/x2) and
Gauntlet (from Armor) +1 (1d3+1/20/x2) and
Unarmed Strike +1 (1d3+1/20/x2) and
Warhammer +1 (1d8+1/20/x3)
Spell-Like Abilities Acid Dart (6/day), Artificer's Touch (6/day)
Cleric Spells Prepared (CL 1, 1 melee touch, 0 ranged touch):
1 (2/day) Summon Monster I, Animate Rope, Sanctuary (DC 14)
0 (at will) Purify Food and Drink (DC 13), Detect Magic, Guidance

STATS & EQUIP:

Str 12, Dex 10, Con 13, Int 13, Wis 17, Cha 13
Base Atk +0; CMB +1; CMD 11
Feats Extra Channel
Traits Perseverance, Strength of the Land
Skills Acrobatics -5, Climb -4, Craft (Stonemasonry) +5, Diplomacy +5, Escape Artist -5, Fly -5, Knowledge (Religion) +5, Ride -5, Stealth -5, Swim -4
Languages Common, Dwarven, Terran
SQ Aura (Ex), Cleric Channel Positive Energy 1d6 (6/day) (DC 11) (Su), Cleric Domain: Artifice, Cleric Domain: Earth, Greed, Hardy +2, Hatred +1, Slow and Steady, Spontaneous Casting, Stability +4, Stonecunning +2, Weapon Cord
Combat Gear Scale Mail, Shield, Light Steel, Warhammer; Other Gear Artisan's tools: Craft (Stonemasonry), Backpack (empty), Blanket, Rations, trail (per day) (5), Weapon Cord

SPECIAL ABILITIES:

Acid Dart (1d6+0) (6/day) (Sp) 30' Ranged touch attack deals 1d6+0 Acid damage.
Artificer's Touch (1d6+0) (6/day) (Sp) Melee touch attack deals 1d6+0 damage to objects or constructs, bypassing 1 hardness.
Aura (Ex) The Cleric has an aura corresponding to his deity's alignment.
Cleric Channel Positive Energy 1d6 (6/day) (DC 11) (Su) A good cleric can channel positive energy to heal the living and injure the undead; an evil cleric can channel negative energy to injure the living and heal the undead.
Cleric Domain: Artifice Granted Powers: You can repair damage to objects, animate objects with life, and create objects from nothing.
Cleric Domain: Earth Granted Powers: You have mastery over earth, metal, and stone, can fire darts of acid, and command earth creatures.
Darkvision (60 feet) You can see in the dark (black and white vision only).
Defensive Training +4 Gain a dodge bonus to AC vs monsters of the Giant subtype.
Greed +2 to Appraise checks to determine the price of nonmagical goods that contain precious metals or gemstones.
Hardy +2 Gain a racial bonus to saves vs Poison, Spells and Spell-Like effects.
Hatred +1 Gain a racial bonus to attacks vs Goblinoids/Orcs.
Perseverance When you have more than 1 Will saving throw to overcome an effect (such as greater command, hold person, or by using the good fortune ability of the Luck domain), you receive a +3 trait bonus on the extra Will saves against that effect.
Slow and Steady Your base speed is never modified by encumbrance.
Spontaneous Casting The Cleric can convert stored spells into Cure or Inflict spells.
Stability +4 Gain bonus to CMD vs bull rush/trip while standing on ground.
Stonecunning +2 +2 bonus to Perception vs unusual stonework. Free check within 10 feet.
Strength of the Land You gain a +1 trait bonus on caster level checks while touching the ground or unworked stone. This includes dispel checks and checks to overcome spell resistance.
Weapon Cord Attached weapon can be recovered as a swift action.

BACKGROUND:

Still to come...


Hehe, of course a fleshed out cleric pops-up the moment I mention a cleric. Well, no switching to cleric for me then. I'd still like to join though.

Group 1: Tim kicks off
Group 2: AZ kicks off? Posting like a madman and all. I mean a mad postfrequency... ok maybe mad content too ;)


Oh sorry for forgetting you two, Brass Pigeon and Thorid.

I´m of course okay with a healer.

@Thorid: Maybe you want to join "my" group?

@Brass Pigeon: Do you wanna join "AZ´s" group?

Is everybody okay with that?

I, as a DM, will just boost every encounter by an additional 25% monsters (except for solos/bosses, these guys just gain maximum possible hit points and +25% XP).

If there are no vetos within the next 48 hours, I will open a set of new threads for "my" group and put their link in here.

Looking forward to some really good gaming with you, guys.

@Other DM (whoever it may be): If you like, we can talk about a possible connection of both groups. Although this could be difficult, if both groups play similar adventures.


That's fine with me. Considering the attrition rate of pbp (summer is killing my games!!!) we might haven have to resort to merging the groups on a later moment.


I am happy with your party composition Tim, I'd just like to have until the weekend to finalise the character alias if that's okay with you.


I need a little extra time to finish as well. I had no power last nite and I will be away at a wedding this weekend where not only will I be the best man but also will apparently be performing the ceremony, due to the justice of the peace having a death in her family....

And no, I have no legal authority to do this, other than my sheer awesomeness...

Cheliax

I was forgotten as well, even though I posted early and often, until the randomization process started.

My concept was a small character mounted on a medium mount. I have settled on a cavalier. Race is TBD but I can have a full crunch this afternoon. I am close.


4 archetypes: Chelish Diva/Daredevil/Dawnflower Dervish/Savage Skald
archetype: 4d100 ⇒ (77, 8, 39, 94) = 218

If Loup Blanc decides to play a Barbarian I'll make a wizard instead. Let me know!


One issue in our group may be the lack of a point man. My race/class steers more towards an archer than tank. Perhaps if our cleric rebuilt a little as a tank, or if we had the cavalier...

101 to 150 of 211 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Online Campaigns / Recruitment / Interest Check: Playing Pathfinder and taking turns at DMing All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.