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 Immortal's Blood Red Roses: A Skull & Shackles Campaign

Game Master imimrtl

Current Map.


701 to 750 of 3,253 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>

M kitsune rogue (pirate)/4; bard(sea singer)/2 AC18 (T 16, FF 12); HP 43/53; saves F +2, R +12, W +4; bab: 4; melee 4(+9), ranged +9; CMB 4, CMD 20; speed 30; init +5(+7); perc +9(11)(+13)

Actually, Seijiro isn't against the idea of becoming pirates.... He's all for it in fact, though being a privateer would be fine too.

As for becoming a rogue-ninja, Flynn, that's not allowed - per UC, pg 8, "A character who takes a level in an alternate class can never take a level in its associated class and vice versa", so no cavalier-samurai and no ninja-rogues.

I wouldn't have minded being ninja class from the beginning now that I read up on it, but I didn't make that choice, so I'm stuck with rogue and perhaps another class if I choose to multi-class, just not with ninja lol.


F Elf Ranger (Freebooter) 4, Inquisitor 2/AC 18/ HP 48/48, F+8 R+6 W+6 (+2 vs Enchantments)/ Init +4(+6), Perc. +11(+13)
DM Immortal wrote:
Also, you know you can be pirates without being murderous savages. Pirates even had flags they would raise that signaled they would accept a peaceful surrender. If it was refused then a different flag would be raised signaling no quarter. You don't have to be monsters to be pirates. Great example is Mal from Firefly. Also, just because you are a pirate doesnt mean you have to rape and murder and such. You can be the pirate version of gentlemen, or women, thieves trying to make your way in the world without being tied to a government.

Good to know. I wasn't sure which kind of pirate my fellow pressed mates wanted to be. ;) I certainly like the gentlemanly/gentlewomanly kind. Rain doesn't want to be a monster. lol


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)
DM Immortal wrote:

Just FYI everyone, I just got a call and my grandfather has taken a turn for the worse. That said I am still on for today but if you suddenly don't see me on in the next few days that might be why. I will try and let you know as soon as I can so you don't worry needlessly. Nothing has happened yet but we got some news about his condition that is not so good.

Anyway, enough of that and I've been really glad to have the escape this game provides over the last few days. Great work everyone!

Your grandfather is in my prayers. I hope he and all of your family are alright. I know that must be hard for all of you, take all the time you need.


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)

Lots of things to consider. With the GM needing some time to deal with stuff, I just want to toss up some things that have been mentioned, but it’s something to think about.

1. Okay – I figure that one of things we need to remember is that the person who is “pilot” needs to know the rules for “driving” a vehicle (in this case, a ship).

To sum up a few things that I’ve seen, and talked to the GM with – the first thing to consider is what type of Ship we’d ultimately like to have.

Ships generally have different checks to “drive them”. For example – a galley, which uses oars, can have an Intimidate Check to propel it – but a “Schooner” would use Knowledge: Nature to get the most out of the winds.

Furthermore, if you take the Feat “Skilled Driver” – it applies to one “class” of vehicles. The GM indicated that for now – that class is open to the following: Barge, Galley (2 types under it) Keelboat, Longship, Rowboat (2 types), Sailing Ship (5 Types), Warship (4 types). Right now there is some loose debate on how rigid the Feat is.

The reason this Feat is important, is because if you get it – it unlocks “Expert Driver” – both of them are useful in piloting a ship – because Skilled Driver gives you a +4 bonus to any “Drive Check” in the appropriate “vehicle” and “expert” not only bumps that bonus, but it gives you combat bonuses to use the ship with. Point is – if our pilot takes the Feats Skilled Driver: Sailing Ship – then Expert Driver: Sailing Ship – then we buy a Warship – they’ve just wasted two Feats.

This is why I think that the Feat refers to any “Water Vessel” (it’s how it is written, but seems ambiguous) but the GM is not sure, but thinks it refers to “types” of ships. If that is true – we need to know at least what type of ship we plan on having for the rest of the campaign, because a ship is not like a sword or magic armor – it affects the entire game. If we don’t plan for that – we can really screw ourselves up in the long-run.

2. Next – as for pirates or privateers? I’d be privateer all the way. I don’t know what the campaign holds down the line as I don’t have the campaign books, but I really would rather be a privateer than a pirate. I hope the book is not going to shoe-horn us in to one specific thing, though, because that would suck. Hopefully we’ll have some freedom once we get past this part of the adventure.

But my personal opinion is that if we go privateer – we get all the advantages of a pirate. We’re our own boss – we do what missions we want, when we want – we sail where we want – and act how we want. The major difference I can see in real life is that if we get letters of marque from a nation that is generally good – we can still do what we want – but we can’t attack ships from that nation. And if we attack ships that are the enemy of that nation – we just go back to the governor (or whoever) and get a huge reward.

Hell, Sir Francis Drake was knighted for his success at being a British privateer – but the Spanish still called him a pirate.

It gives us the chance to realistically be “nicer” – more like “swashbucklers” than “thugs”, in my opinion. I’d rather be more like that than having to slum around Port Peril, drinking rum and grog and other similar piraty stereotypes, but that’s my opinion.

What does anyone else think of being “privateer” vs. “pirate”. If we had to vote, I’d pick “privateer”. What would you guys pick?

Sorry GM – I’d rather pick Han Solo the rebel Privateer instead of Mal Reynolds the former Browncoat Pirate… Han can at least use a lightsaber, but Mal can’t even handle a sword properly in a duel! :)

3. Concerning Captain/Pilot and overlapping skills?

Of course we’d need overlap. If one person goes down, then we’d lose a chief player. Right now Profession: Sailor is used to “Drive” ships. Rain and Sko have the best Wisdom – that means they have the best base chance to drive ships. Sko’s is a bit better, but Rain has a trait bonus to balance out. Sko would be a great “first officer”, especially with an Intimidate Check – the good cop to Rain’s bad cop – and if she went down he’d make a great person to step up to the wheel.

I just didn’t want to hit level 3 and look up to see everyone on the ship had taken “Skilled Driver: Sailing Ships” – that would seem like a big waste of time if we all did that – so I figured we could avoid the overlap now and try to work with each other, as a new Feat is coming up.

Dhaavan is right about the magic crafting thing – personally, I don’t want to pick that Feat anyway – but I recommended doing it only because I figure “if it helps the group – why not?” And Dhaavan, thank you for the advice on the matter – I’m relieved I don’t have to take it.

As for any officer or position of rank on the ship – if we have someone say “This is how it is” it’s hard for me to believe everyone will just agree out of hand. At least – I haven’t seen it so far. If it works, that’s cool – I just don’t see it working right now. I see us more asking questions and debates – I wish it didn’t happen that way – but I'm guessing it will.

Jiro – bad luck about the “ninja/rouge” thing. But rogues have a pretty good set of skills you could use to balance yourself out. Depending on where you want to go – you might think of cross-classing with a fighter type; if you want to be more martial. Nothing wrong with the classics, and a fighter/rogue was an old standard in even AD&D II Edition.

4. Speaking of things coming up – does anyone have any opinion on how they want to formally divide loot? I tossed up a suggestion before – but I didn’t see much of a response. But I’d just assume have that figured out before we get into the chance for our next big “pay-off”


F Elf Ranger (Freebooter) 4, Inquisitor 2/AC 18/ HP 48/48, F+8 R+6 W+6 (+2 vs Enchantments)/ Init +4(+6), Perc. +11(+13)

I like the privateer tag myself more than pirate. So I vote for "Privateer". :)

I like the Rain/Sko combo. Rain has some 'Intimidate' too (+5) for it is a class skill. She needs to bump up her Diplomacy, however. So if Sko wants to be First Mate/Officer to Rain's Captaincy (assuming this is the way we go), then I am all for it.

I need to find your posting re loot division -- I can't recollect seeing it. Sorry. Goes off to look back through the entries.

Jiro mentioned something about taking on the role of Quartermaster? What do the others' think? We would then have a First Mate and a Quartermaster which personally I do not mind, but I'll ask the experts on this, can both exist on a ship at the same time or do the titles/responsibilities overlap too much? We could always define and distinguish them to fit our needs/wants.

Taldor

Male Elf Magus 3 (AC: 15,12,13; HP: 24; Saves 4,3,4; Init +2, perc +7)

Replay to Flynn

1) in my opinion it is almost pointless to take the driver feat now as we don't even know if we will have a ship at third level. We may find that we have to sell the ship for some reasons no the next.entier book is land based. Not that it isn't a good idea to think about it it I for me I try to be more fluid with the campaign and take what make sense at the time. Not the best way to optimize but feels more organic that way.

2) As Immortal mentioned we can be pirates without being monsters about it. Either pirate or privateer works but the players guide said to be ready to accept being pirates so that is the way I am leaning.

3) OOC whoever wants to be captain can take it. I don't think too many people are jumping at it. Same thing applies to the other positions. If people want a certain position just say so and we'll work around it IC.

So far it sounded like
Rain: captain
Sko and Dhaavan: the new incarnation of Plugg and Scourge albeit nicer
Variel: master at arms
Flynn: did you mention siege weapons expert at one point
Jiro: mentioned quartermaster at one point but don't know how accurate that is
Valeros: ???? Surgeon????

4) At one time we discussed that everyone keep a tab on their character for loot obtained and keep a running total of gp worth of items. Then whenever something comes along whoever has the least value gets first choice for items.


I'll just say one thing about the whole privateer/pirate thing. I understand you want to be a privateer but this campaign is based around being a pirate. The whole campaign is designed around the idea that you all are going to be pirates. It does not stipulate that you have to be evil or rape or murder or anything like that but there are systems in place that are there with the assumption that you are in a pirate campaign and want to be pirates. If you don't want to be pirates why are we playing a campaign where that is the essential plot line?

A large portion of the game is about setting yourselves up as Free Captains of the Shackles. In fact a whole book is dedicated to that. As I have not read every adventure yet I can't say whether being a Privateer for Sargava is even feasible. I can't imagine the Free Captains allowing members to those that aren't, in their eyes, free due to the fact that they are working for Sargava.

So if you don't want to be pirates in the traditional sense then I need to know that now as that changes the complexity of the game significantly.


F Elf Ranger (Freebooter) 4, Inquisitor 2/AC 18/ HP 48/48, F+8 R+6 W+6 (+2 vs Enchantments)/ Init +4(+6), Perc. +11(+13)

Okay, pirates (Free Captains of the Shackles) is fine by me. Sorry.


No need to apologize Rain. I think it was my fault for not being clearer at the start. Again, you don't need to be evil or depraved or anything like that but you do have to want to be pirates otherwise the campaign kind of falls on its ass lol.


F Elf Ranger (Freebooter) 4, Inquisitor 2/AC 18/ HP 48/48, F+8 R+6 W+6 (+2 vs Enchantments)/ Init +4(+6), Perc. +11(+13)

Yes, well Rain will be a good pirate. I hadn't designed her for depravity and evilness. ;) (Well maybe if she met the right person? LOL)


M kitsune rogue (pirate)/4; bard(sea singer)/2 AC18 (T 16, FF 12); HP 43/53; saves F +2, R +12, W +4; bab: 4; melee 4(+9), ranged +9; CMB 4, CMD 20; speed 30; init +5(+7); perc +9(11)(+13)

pirates is good with me! like you said, we don't need to be ruthless thugs, Seijiro is NG and wouldn't be okay with rape and thuggery and murder... well killing is okay but outright murder, no.


F Elf Ranger (Freebooter) 4, Inquisitor 2/AC 18/ HP 48/48, F+8 R+6 W+6 (+2 vs Enchantments)/ Init +4(+6), Perc. +11(+13)

Rain is NG, too. So she understands. :)


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)
DM Immortal wrote:

I'll just say one thing about the whole privateer/pirate thing. I understand you want to be a privateer but this campaign is based around being a pirate. The whole campaign is designed around the idea that you all are going to be pirates. It does not stipulate that you have to be evil or rape or murder or anything like that but there are systems in place that are there with the assumption that you are in a pirate campaign and want to be pirates. If you don't want to be pirates why are we playing a campaign where that is the essential plot line?

A large portion of the game is about setting yourselves up as Free Captains of the Shackles. In fact a whole book is dedicated to that. As I have not read every adventure yet I can't say whether being a Privateer for Sargava is even feasible. I can't imagine the Free Captains allowing members to those that aren't, in their eyes, free due to the fact that they are working for Sargava.

So if you don't want to be pirates in the traditional sense then I need to know that now as that changes the complexity of the game significantly.

Okay, I wrote a very long response to this. But I deleted it. Here is the short version.

1. I do not understand “campaign games” very well. I have only run 2 in my whole life. One of them was a 2 session Conan Game – the other was a Kingmaker game. Both deviated heavily from the way the “plot” suggested. I am not used to games when both players and the GM are constrained by pre-existing plot, and it is very difficult for me to deal with, as it is such a foreign concept for me. I am sorry for that, and for deviating from the plot or encouraging others to do so. I don't own, nor have I read the books, and I didn't know that my suggestions would complicate things.

2. You asked why I wanted to play a pirate game and not be a pirate. The answer is – to me, pirates are synonymous with being free. I was excited to play a game that was built around characters that loved personal freedom. I was excited at the chance to play a game when anything goes – and when we quickly got our ship – we could sail anywhere we wanted – from Sargava to Absalom, all the way to Qadira – if we the players decided that would be fun.

I did not realize we were to stay in The Shackles, though, or I would not have suggested otherwise. I'm sorry for that, too.

3. I do not have the Campaign Books – nor have I read them. I believe now that this is a problem for me. I think it would be better if I just buy the books and just read them, and I think it would make the game better for everyone.

It would be better for everyone because all of my ideas so far are based on what knowledge I have in real about sailors and naval history. Any time you see a “wiki” source – it wasn’t something I looked up to solve the mystery – it was something I knew, and wanted to share and used the link to help express it.

I also feel that the majority of my postings have been a waste because I didn’t read the books and know what was to be expected of us. I believe this affected my posting negatively for everyone. For example:

There was no reason to construct the Fighting Top – it did nothing for how we were supposed to attack the pirate ship. Writing and reading that just bogged down the game. If I knew we were leaving The Wormwood and the Fighting Top would not be used in the combat, I wouldn’t have written it.

There was no reason to try to save or help the Rahadoum officer. That she was saved was nice but not needed. And even though we saved her – I believe that even if we had rolled a 35+ on our Diplomacy – she was not leaving The Wormwood.

In separate conversations, I said my chances with her an “Auto Fail” but all I meant by that comment was I suddenly realized that whatever we did with Diplomacy – that officer was not our version of “Robert ‘The Drake’ Tyrell”; but I had hoped she was. Afterwards, when we left and saw her stay behind, I realized that even with a natural 20 – she would not have been our “Drake”. If I had read the books, I would have known that, and not bog down the game with my postings to get her on our side.

There was no reason for me to try to speculate on a Squib. I know naval lore – but beyond that I recognized that term from The Fellowship of the Ring when Gandalf gave Bilbo fireworks, including "squibs" – I never have seen or heard any reference to a Squib – other than the ones I posted.

All my guessing, theories, conjecture, ideas, and – most importantly – the length of the posts with all of those things – from the Fighting Top all the way to the concept of being “privateers” instead of sticking to playing not only pirates, but pirates with a specific goal; which seems to be the king of pirates – all of my extra posts have only clogged up the boards.

I apologize for that – it was not my intention to do these things.

If we are pirates, that’s the way game works. If we have to stay in the Shackles exclusively, that’s okay, too. I just want to play, and was trying to do everything I could think of to make the game fun.

I thought being a privateer – when most of our players are some version of good would be not only fun, but really cool; as would having a "base camp" in some place like the real town of Port Royal. Finally, historically - the only difference between a "pirate" and a "privateer" is a matter of perception. The Spanish forces that Sir Francis Drake attacked did not see him as a privateer, no matter what his letters of marque said - to them he was a pirate; even though he saw himself as a man of honor who was later knighted for his service to the British Crown. I thought that we could be like that - I did not know it was not possible, and that was a mistake.

I thought once we had the ship we could sail wherever we felt like – from The Shackles to Absalom to Qadira. But I also assumed that before we sail the ends of the earth, we’d need to make sure our ship was our “castle” – which is I why I kept posting all those requests for good builds to full self-sufficiency on the Discussion Thread.

I wanted us to be a self-sustaining “micro city” – if we planned on sailing all the way to Geb for adventures. But I don't think that matters anymore, now, because I don't think that's how the game is supposed to go. We're not supposed to sail to Geb or Qadira, and I think that if I suggested it, it would complicate things, not make them fun.

I will say these errors were accidents. I just didn’t know how the game was meant to work; I am not used to boxed set material, and sticking to a plot. I thought my ideas would be cool and fun, I didn't know they would complicate things. Sticking to a pre-existing plot is a new experience for me and I'm sorry for any complications.


Male Gillman Oracle (Waves) 4; AC 14 (T 11, FF13) / HP: 34/34 / F +4, R +3, W +5 / Init: +1 / Percep: +0

My two cents.

First: Hell yeah I want to be a Pirate!!! :-D

Second: The campaign is kind of designed around us being pirates but that doesn't have to railroad our actions any. The story and DM will (hopefully) be able to direct us to interesting hooks that keep us in the area but there isn't anything stopping us from sailing around and pillaging to our heart's content. I'm running this game for another group and there is a large amount of freedom given to the group once this first part is finalized. It's up to the DM to get us back on the Campaign track via hooks and plot points if we stray but soon enough we'll be free pirates of our own making. (Assuming we're not all keel-hauled and TPK'ed lol.)

Third: The campaign is designed from a pirate's perspective and everyone should want to be a pirate for one reason or another, rather than a privateer. This is the reasoning behind taking the campaign traits cause they almost all leave you with at least a neutrality towards pirates, if not a desire to be one. That being the case, Horatio looking at your traits and background you certainly have the most compelling case for non-piracy of any character in the game which makes this harder for you. A respectable ship's surgeon could very understandably want to work for a "legitimate" ship sailing under a nation's flag. The hope is that through roleplay and time, you'll come around to the skallywag way of life.

Fourth: For Rain or others devoted to Besmara, she is the goddess of pirates and worshipped as such. If you look at her entry, she is a CN deity so there's no implicit need to be Evil to be a pirate whereas in my mind a privateer is of a more Lawful bent, being a representative of a formal government which is the opposite of what pirates stand for. But the key here is, as Immortal said, you don't need to be an Evil pirate to be a pirate. I think our current situation has soured folks on what a pirate is but we're dealing with one example of an evil man who has pressganged sailors into his crew and shown no mercy to those he's pillaged. I'm sure there are plenty of pirates in the Shackles that aren't this blood thirsty and if we survive long enough to get out on our own, we might actually get to see that.

So I guess my point is, we all "need" to be pirates from a campaign perspective but that doesn't necessarily dictate how we play our characters or what we're allowed to do with them. But as I said, this is just my two cents.


Human Fey Tattooed Sorcerer 1 (HP: 7, AC:13 /F:1,R:3,W:4/ Init. +3 / Perc. +6/+8)(Jack's Perc: +13/+15)

Flynn, instead of buying the adventure and spoiloing the plot for yourself, you can read the synopses online to get the idea of where the story is going. Reading the adventure in advance raises issues about you knowinf what's coming up.
You post a lot, Flynn, and have a lot of ideas about what we should do. If you read the module, eyou would either have a lot of posts directing us with knowledge of what happens in game, and direct us through, making the GM need to change a LOT of the mod to keep things interesting.
OR you would post all kinds of options, some good some bad and the game could develop a multiple choice aspect.
OR we'd be left guessing about wether or not you are doing something and acting as a red-herring or directing us towadt the optimal solution. Do you like an NPC cause they are important, you think it's an interesting IC discussion, they betray us or what.
OR you post less, discuss things but never vote, like Brett in our KM game.

I thought the fighting-top thing was cool, kinda fun thing to do on our 3-day speed-up that was better than just posting rolls.
If you think it's an issue, run your ideas by the GM. When you wanted to go privateer, you could ask if that would work in this game. Ask if the Fighting-top would be useful, and if not he can let you know.
I asked about crafting time, and other plans I have for Dhaavan, and he let me know there would be some down-time for crafting.

So checking in with him could be the way to go. Better than reading ahead


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)
Valeros Jaloksin wrote:

My two cents.

First: Hell yeah I want to be a Pirate!!! :-D

Second: The campaign is kind of designed around us being pirates but that doesn't have to railroad our actions any. The story and DM will (hopefully) be able to direct us to interesting hooks that keep us in the area but there isn't anything stopping us from sailing around and pillaging to our heart's content. I'm running this game for another group and there is a large amount of freedom given to the group once this first part is finalized. It's up to the DM to get us back on the Campaign track via hooks and plot points if we stray but soon enough we'll be free pirates of our own making. (Assuming we're not all keel-hauled and TPK'ed lol.)

Third: The campaign is designed from a pirate's perspective and everyone should want to be a pirate for one reason or another, rather than a privateer. This is the reasoning behind taking the campaign traits cause they almost all leave you with at least a neutrality towards pirates, if not a desire to be one. That being the case, Horatio looking at your traits and background you certainly have the most compelling case for non-piracy of any character in the game which makes this harder for you. A respectable ship's surgeon could very understandably want to work for a "legitimate" ship sailing under a nation's flag. The hope is that through roleplay and time, you'll come around to the skallywag way of life.

Fourth: For Rain or others devoted to Besmara, she is the goddess of pirates and worshipped as such. If you look at her entry, she is a CN deity so there's no implicit need to be Evil to be a pirate whereas in my mind a privateer is of a more Lawful bent, being a representative of a formal government which is the opposite of what pirates stand for. But the key here is, as Immortal said, you don't need to be an Evil pirate to be a pirate. I think our current situation has soured folks on what a pirate is but we're dealing with one example of an evil man who has pressganged sailors into his crew...

Thank you Valeros, I appreciate the feedback.

There are a few points I’d like to make, though.

1. Pirate or Privateer is in the eyes of the beholder, as I see it. Also, I believe a lot of your information about what a pirate really was is not aligned to my own understanding of the term based on the stuff I’ve read. That doesn’t mean you’re wrong and I’m right, but it does mean that we’re looking at this very differently.

Formally a pirate was someone who attempted to use force to board another person’s ship without legal permission from the captain. I mean, that's all it was. If I tried to climb on your ship when I asked to board and the captain said "no", I could be hanged for just trying to climb on your ship. All the rest of it is just from dramatization, and won’t effect how play at all, be it pirate or privateer.

Also, you could call yourself “privateer” all day, but that would make no difference at all if you failed. For example, British privateers, captured by French or Spanish naval forces were not judged any less of a pirate because they happened to be carrying Letters of Marque. The only nation that actually would care about those letters, was the one that issued those letters. Furthermore, being a privateer carried a responsibility – because it was assumed you’d pay the crown a “cut” of your loot, and the crown might reward you with rank and privilege, but your chief and most important formal reward from the crown was not being hanged for boarding another ship by force without a captain’s permission.

So, if a British sailor, who was not formally part of the British Navy was pirating a French ship, and if France and Britain were at war, and the independent British sailor succeeded at boarding and taking the French ship, than he returned to England and shared the loot and good news – he would be judged a pirate by British forces for his action, even though it was with an enemy ship, if he didn't have the letters from British Authorities to do that.

Unless that sailor had legal letters of marque to “legally attack enemies of the crown” – their own country would execute them for destroying a national enemy simply because they didn’t have the documents.

Those documents also cost money – another way for a nation to make money. They sold licenses to British sailors – and the British sailors were allowed to pirate enemy ships without penalty, provided they paid for the license and they also turned over a cut of the loot to the crown.

The only formal freedom an “independent pirate” (like the British sailor who attacked without those letters) would have is that they would not be making payments to the crown – but again, that means they had no “safe port”, or base of operations, except hidden coves and so on; such as this “Blood Cove” thing seems to be.

There is, as I see it, no actual difference technically in game mechanics between us working for a country in this game – paying them for letters of marque – attacking a ship, taking a cut of the loot back to the crown, and receiving a “reward” in terms of reputation, praise, possible privileges in the town/port, and esteem with others in the field; and being a pirate who is forced to “pay protection money to the Pirate King to practice work in his turf” – then, once the job is done “returning to the Pirate King and giving him his tribute like any other crime boss” – while all the rest about the privilege and so remains true.

So I’m not sure why there would be any problem – and I’m not sure why there would be any issue. Unless people prefer specifically playing an “evil” character type. But not all pirates are evil – most were only judged evil by the people they attacked.

Now, as for being pirates verses privateers? Well, right now, for me personally, even with all the nonsense that comes with being a formal privateer, I would still rather be a privateer – even though mechanically I think there would be no difference in game dynamics (except maybe Diplomacy would be more important then Intimidate). The only reason that is the case for me – since mechanics would likely remain the same, is because I would rather play a hero, such as Mal from Firefly, or Han Solo.

Regarding them, yes; Han Solo was a pirate – they called him that specifically, but he did good works. Mal from Firefly was a pirate, and he did good works –but neither of them were very likeable (in my opinion) until they began the slow journey of redemption that gave them depth of character, complexity of personality, and inner struggles to overcome, which led eventually for the chance of real heroism by completing heroic tasks.

So, regarding that – that’s why I prefer privateer.

The alternative is I play a stereotypical “pirate” – not a man is like a Robin Hood outlaw – but a man with no honor, no code, no scruples – a man consumed by a drives of greed, and to be evil.

While all pirates are not like that, I simply don’t understand why we would try to dance around a “Gray Area”? Why not just open the door and go the nine and say “We’re going to keelhaul the women, spit the children on pikes – and you don’t even want to know what we’ll do to the men folk! Why? Because we’re pirates!”

If we’re going to be “nice” pirates, I mean – I just don’t understand the point of being a nice pirate, when we could be nice anyway and call ourselves Privateers. If a person doesn't like the idea of paying a cut of the loot to their government, and wants to keep it all for themselves, I udnerstand that, they want to be “true pirates”. That makes sense, but what I don't get then is why not just open the door to every alignments, and we can just be pure evil, if we want?

The Gray Area for me is the point of confusion here, I think.

2. Since I know what legal pirates were – and I know that Privateers where still called pirates but the enemies they hit (though they were heroes to specific nations, tribes, kingdoms or whatever) – and since I know that there was mechanically no difference between pirate and privateer – I don’t understand the need to play “piratey”. Again, I think that is only a mechanical issue – I don’t know what that means – but I can guess.

My guess is – that by playing a “pirate” – we are expected to channel the essence of Jack Sparrow, Long John Silver, Davy Jones, or Captain Hook. To do that, we’re expected to squint, and drool a little, a drink lots of rum, and say “yar”, and have a hook hand, and talk about “booty” and “X marks the Spot!” – and so on.

I don’t know if that is what it means to be “piratey” – but I pray it is not. That seems so cliché and dull to me that it would actually kill my enjoyment of the game. I don’t want to play/write a cliché – I want to play a pirate the way I see a pirate would be played.

On the basic surface – Horatio is a man from his homeland who would not attack his own people, unless given just cause. He would easily attack enemies of his nation, unless he knew a reason not to. He would attack enemies of his goddess, unless he knew a reason not to. He would fight to help the helpless. He would take only his fair cut of spoils if they were found.

If he saw a Cheliax ship – they are at war – he’d attack it, and have no problem, but probably feeling a guilty conscious for simply butchereing sailors employed to do a job – he might give part of his spoils to a church, or send some to his family at home – or to someone like that. He’d attack monsters, or undead, or heretics, or enemies. His conscious did not mind attacking the Rahadoum ship – because they are enemies of his country, they are slavers, drug runners, and they also are heretics. Killing them: job well done.

If he attacked ship from his homeland – that would have been a very different battle for him.

So – to sum up – I don’t see a mechanical difference between pirate and privateer – no issue there, and only a marginal difference in legality – again, no worries.

My only issue as a player to playing a “true pirate” now is that I don’t want to be corny, lame, cheesy, and above all – cliché – and have to “act” like a pirate. So far I hoped there would be some latitude on that front – there are plenty of folk on The Wormood who aren’t the stereotype – but the business with “the rum”, and having to use Intimidate just to get things done – if we go that route – I can’t understand we would have a gray area. If we’re going to butcher people to the man like The Dread Pirate Roberts – why bother sparing anyone?

Okay – that’s pretty much it. Mister GM – this is a lot of information from me – but it mainly centers around the nuances of how the campaign is “supposed” to function. I don’t know – I don’t have the books. I can’t reconcile the two aspects. Anything you can do to help me with that would be very much appreciated. Thank you!


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)
Dhaavan wrote:

Flynn, instead of buying the adventure and spoiloing the plot for yourself, you can read the synopses online to get the idea of where the story is going. Reading the adventure in advance raises issues about you knowinf what's coming up.

You post a lot, Flynn, and have a lot of ideas about what we should do. If you read the module, eyou would either have a lot of posts directing us with knowledge of what happens in game, and direct us through, making the GM need to change a LOT of the mod to keep things interesting.
OR you would post all kinds of options, some good some bad and the game could develop a multiple choice aspect.
OR we'd be left guessing about wether or not you are doing something and acting as a red-herring or directing us towadt the optimal solution. Do you like an NPC cause they are important, you think it's an interesting IC discussion, they betray us or what.
OR you post less, discuss things but never vote, like Brett in our KM game.

I thought the fighting-top thing was cool, kinda fun thing to do on our 3-day speed-up that was better than just posting rolls.
If you think it's an issue, run your ideas by the GM. When you wanted to go privateer, you could ask if that would work in this game. Ask if the Fighting-top would be useful, and if not he can let you know.
I asked about crafting time, and other plans I have for Dhaavan, and he let me know there would be some down-time for crafting.

So checking in with him could be the way to go. Better than reading ahead

Thank you for the feedback Dhaavan.

You are right, I do post a lot. My jobs are both erratic and all over the place in scheduling - and often times I'm not sure when I'll be working each week, until the day before that week. As such - I often have a lot of free time to think and write.

I do both on this board - but I have learned from many previous PBP experiences - my level of writing is a lot for people. It's hard to read and remember on the run, and it's almost annoying to people to come back to see 10 new posts - 6 from me - and 4 from the other 6 players.

But I am mentioning the books because a lot of what I plan and ask and consider takes up a lot of space. And if those ideas open debates - that is even more space. I feel it would be better to cut all of that out, unless it has a chance of even working.

I liked the fighting top idea, too - I figured we'd attack another ship. I measured the distance from the main mast to the edge of our deck - on a daignol calculation to determine the best hight for it so you could be up there casting spells (never mind ranged weapons). All that planning and roling and social RP on the thing was ultimatley a huge waste of time - because when we went to fight - it was "Okay - now you have to go across and fight in cloud cover. They have no gunpowder - but you can't use "hot shot" or fire arrows to set their rigging on fire - even though that can be doused with a "create water spell" (which does have a range to it) pretty easily so it won't get out of hand".

I quickly understand that fight was supposed to be a certain way to compliment it's CR. We were not supposed to be on our ship - using ranged weapons - hence the cloud cover to screw that chance up. We were committed to charging over and hacking it out - right in the thick of things.

The same was true of our fishing trip. No boat on a fishing trip? That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Of course - if we had a boat, and were attacked, we'd just row away quickly and safely - probably. But as we were all in the water - we have no movement speed, and had to fight in the water for the specific way the combat went down.

Again - the board was clogged up with me asking for a boat - and I was punished for asking for a boat - which still seems stupid. It wasn't stupid only because it was needed to get us into a water combat.

Just like we went into the bilges to fight dire rats. Really? We couldn't have dropped a flask or two of oil in there - closed the hatch and lit the oil? It wouldn't do much except smoke and fume heavily - burnig out as soon as the water of the bigles mixed with the fire. And the wood of the hold so wet that it wouldn't matter. So why do it? Because the smoke would suffocate the rats.

But that's not how that fight was supposed to go. I knew that then - which is why I jumped into the thing.

The only issue I am concerned about is that I post a lot. I write a lot - and you guys get to come home and see these long crazy posts - and if you already know there is no point in trying to kill Plugg with poison, as that is a boring way to kill a "boss" - then all my postings would be twice as annoying to you guys.

The same is true with my constant questions on how we make ourselves cool for the ship.

Do I want me, you, or anyone to waste Feats on Crafting? Hell no! But if we sailed back to Jiro's country (Why not?) on the way, being able to craft our own supplies on the ship would be really handy.

But if I suggest that - and some of you take those Feats - that's really a waste of time for you, and it's not needed for us. If that is how things go, then I might already know that by studying the books with a fine tooth comb.

I haven't - and since I haven't - I'm nervouss my constant posts and ideas are just ruing the fun for people.

That was the nature of my problem. But I am hoping to get more resolved with the GM tonight, so we'll see how it goes.


F Elf Ranger (Freebooter) 4, Inquisitor 2/AC 18/ HP 48/48, F+8 R+6 W+6 (+2 vs Enchantments)/ Init +4(+6), Perc. +11(+13)

At this point, I'm thinking that maybe Flynn should take the mantle of Captain as he seems to be quite the enthusiastic strategist with a take-charge manner.


M kitsune rogue (pirate)/4; bard(sea singer)/2 AC18 (T 16, FF 12); HP 43/53; saves F +2, R +12, W +4; bab: 4; melee 4(+9), ranged +9; CMB 4, CMD 20; speed 30; init +5(+7); perc +9(11)(+13)

Don't even say such things in jest.


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)

Jiro is correct, Rain.

In any case, I have no interest in that position, though. I was only trying to help.

Meanwhile, I'll try to cut back on the excessive postings.


Male Gillman Oracle (Waves) 4; AC 14 (T 11, FF13) / HP: 34/34 / F +4, R +3, W +5 / Init: +1 / Percep: +0

I wouldn't say cut back on the posting, your stuff does have lots of good detail. I would just suggest you make extensive use of spoiler tags.


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)

Thank you for your compliment and advice, Valeros. I will do that more in the future, then.

Meanwhile, good hunting.


Human Fey Tattooed Sorcerer 1 (HP: 7, AC:13 /F:1,R:3,W:4/ Init. +3 / Perc. +6/+8)(Jack's Perc: +13/+15)

the long streaches of text do make navigation tougher.
Breaking up things into well-labled spoilers maybe with a tl:dr synopsis imediately after in OOC will make it much easier to parse for the information we're looking for, as well as not fill up the page. I like reading your stuff too, but i loke scrolling through huge walls of text slightly less, and needing to sift through the whole page over an over for references to things. Spoilers act as chapter tags and that's really helpful.

Rain Taneththir wrote:
Yes, well Rain will be a good pirate. I hadn't designed her for depravity and evilness. ;) (Well maybe if she met the right person? LOL)

Dhaavan was Evil. Is that an invitation? =P

JK, tho, he's more Lawful in his own strange way than anything else, and not doing Evil anymore. Not saying he cares about following rules, but that order and consistency makes sense to him. gotta love alignment based on neurosis.


Human Druid (Shark shaman) 2, Barbarian (Beast Totem) 1/AC: 13/HP: 30/F +7, R +0, W +6/Init. +0/Per. +7

Dhavaan was evil. You had your chance and you blew it. Way to make us all look bad. ;)


Human Fey Tattooed Sorcerer 1 (HP: 7, AC:13 /F:1,R:3,W:4/ Init. +3 / Perc. +6/+8)(Jack's Perc: +13/+15)

He could always go back if he met the right person. ;P

Couple things I want to mention about Jack:
1. He is a bird with 6 int. He's bloody brilliant for a bird, but has something along the lines of about a 60 IQ (considering that 100 is average and 200 is max)

He kinda should be dumb, but I play him as kinda childish. This is like the not smart orc level of brains, so while he can scout really well with +9 perception, he can only convey so much. So us looking ourselves would yield more info about stuff, but we'll at least not be going blind.

2. He has a 1 mile radius for his empathetic link. So he's a short-range scout. Just so you know that rule. Feel free to ask dhaavan to send him further and get this info in character, but I already posted about Jack having limits, and it would be awkward to bring that up again without prompting.

3. He also speaks common, and has spoken it to the party on occasion. So he understands you guys, and can tell you stuff. If the info isn't spoilered consider it spoken in common. If it is infernal I'll let ya know


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)

Thank you for the information, Dhaavan.

Play him how you would want to, of course. While Koko the ape had an extremely low IQ - she certainly knew over 2,000 signs in the American Sign Language - much more than I do. My point is - having a low IQ for familiars doesn't have to make them dumb, but only limited Intelligence in various fields. I doubt Jack can do long division, or even basic math - but I assumed he could spot enemies and tell us details on what he saw.

I also presumed that even if he extended beyond your empathic link for this project, he would still be able to see things and remember things.

I also presumed that if anyone saw him flying around, they might think "oh no - it's a bird... oh wait; no... just a bird."

Even if they said "There no birds on this island - kill him!" I assumed his base HP, size mod. to AC and ability fly high up would easily allow him to move out of range.

I would also assume that - if he was attacked with range weapons - he could fly quickly back to us if he could find us easily - such as an open beach sitting by a bunch of huts with no tree cover.

This is what happens when I assume, however.

As an aside, I did speak to Dhaavan specifically in-character; if Dhaavan felt this was a bad move, I would not have minded social RPing it with you on the main board.


Human Fey Tattooed Sorcerer 1 (HP: 7, AC:13 /F:1,R:3,W:4/ Init. +3 / Perc. +6/+8)(Jack's Perc: +13/+15)

There was a level of crunch that doesn't realy translate that well through dialogue, such as the 1 mile radious on the empathetic link, and the specifics of the bird's Int mod.

ANd dhaavan did reply in character about Jack's limitations in character, and i don't mind social RP-ing if anyone is inclined to respond to the character with the scout discussing his scout's capabilities.


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)

Fair enough, Dhaavan; I will be more attentive to that in the future :)

Meanwhile - this is a quick general rule clarification question:

I have seen several pieces of errata which suggests magic swords and so on glow in a 15-20 foot radius (radius seemed to depend on the errata).

There is nothing specific on it, that I remember - does anyone remember the ruling on that? It's kind of an important feature - if we're using magic weapons - especially humans - they would glow to let us see in the dark. But (and pardon the pun) that can also be a "double edged sword" here, as it would also give away our position.

Anyway - if anybody knows if there is an official rule please let me know. If it was only errata - GM - please let me know your ruling on it.

Thank you!


It's usually a percentage of them will glow. I usually say if you want it to glow it will and if you dont it wont but once you make the decision you need to stick with it.


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)

Does that count only for weapons we craft - or ones we find? For example - the ones we found - we'd know if they were glowing already - so I assume we can't choose them - unless we can.

In which case - I'll have to think about it. I've played it so far that my sword is glowing - but if not, that's okay, too.

FYI - I sent you some questions in a spoiler post a little bit ago via what my character is doing; if you saw them - I'd love to know the answers when you have a moment, as they currently are effecting what I'd do the very next moment in the game.

Don't worry - it's something piratey, no doubt :)

Thanks!


Ok in which case your sword is glowing then.

As for your questions, I posted them on the other board.


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)
DM Immortal wrote:

Ok in which case your sword is glowing then.

As for your questions, I posted them on the other board.

Very good. Thank you.

What is the current condition of the other weapons, then? Do the players who hold them decide - or do you?

Meanwhile - I will see you on the board.


M kitsune rogue (pirate)/4; bard(sea singer)/2 AC18 (T 16, FF 12); HP 43/53; saves F +2, R +12, W +4; bab: 4; melee 4(+9), ranged +9; CMB 4, CMD 20; speed 30; init +5(+7); perc +9(11)(+13)

core rulebook page 468, 2nd column 1/2 way down the page under 'special qualities' - there is a die roll for whether or not the sword sheds light - if it does, then it always does - you can't turn it off...


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)
Seijiro wrote:
core rulebook page 468, 2nd column 1/2 way down the page under 'special qualities' - there is a die roll for whether or not the sword sheds light - if it does, then it always does - you can't turn it off...

With respect, that's not how the GM is running things in this game.

He allows the players to decide if the weapon glows, without rolling. Despite what the core book says. But no one decided for the other weapons, nor did they roll. Which is why I asked for the conditions of the other weapons.

As an aside - the first rule in the book is (pardon me, I'm paraphrasing a bit) "The following rules are suggestions for how to have a fun game. If the rule doesn't work for your group - don't use it."

I know the GM doesn't always use the "Core Rules" - though his policy has always been "If there is a change via a House Rule - I'll let you know. Once it's been established - that's how we'll play it."

He doesn't mind House Rules, and deviations from the boxed set, so long as the players are aware of them, and stick by them.

When I asked the question initially - it was because I wasn't sure - when he answered specifically - it's his game - so I'll go by his ruling.

Although I will add, I do appreciate your information and the time it took you to track that information down and look it up. I know that doing that kind of research can be time consuming for people, and finding those things can take a lot of work - I appreciate the effort you took in doing that the research on the topic. Thank you very much for your hard work, though.


M kitsune rogue (pirate)/4; bard(sea singer)/2 AC18 (T 16, FF 12); HP 43/53; saves F +2, R +12, W +4; bab: 4; melee 4(+9), ranged +9; CMB 4, CMD 20; speed 30; init +5(+7); perc +9(11)(+13)

Actually it took no time at all, since I knew right where the rule was - I just wasn't at the computer earlier to see the discussion. Now that he knows the rule, he might want to use it - you never know.


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)
Seijiro wrote:
Actually it took no time at all, since I knew right where the rule was - I just wasn't at the computer earlier to see the discussion. Now that he knows the rule, he might want to use it - you never know.

Well, you're right. He may want to use the rule after all, if he didn't know about it. Though I have a hunch he probably knows the rules alright, but this may be an instance where he tends to be simply be more flexible with how he interprets some of them.

But, after you posted this, he may reconsider things. However, I suppose if he changes his mind, he'll let me know :)

Meanwhile - whether you knew exactly where the rule was, or you instead had to spend a long time reading through all the books until you found even the page and paragraph, the important thing is (as I see it) that you bothered to put that information up at all simply to help both me, and the GM, with how this question can be better answered. That was very thoughtful, and I'm sure he appreciates the help as much as I do.

Thanks again!


Yeah I thought it was a percentage and it's 30%. As said above though since you were given the items and they weren't found randomly or made, and I didn't specify then for the ones you have gotten so far you can make the decision whether they glow or not. It's a pretty minor effect though so in the future if it is found randomly I will roll but if it is crafted through magic arms and armor then you can choose. Since the sword was given to you, you can decide whether it glows or not.

Thanks for finding that Seijiro! I appreciate it when there is a question and the players find the rule for me. :-) I may not always use it exactly as stated but it definitely helps when I don't have to try and find it myself.


F Elf Ranger (Freebooter) 4, Inquisitor 2/AC 18/ HP 48/48, F+8 R+6 W+6 (+2 vs Enchantments)/ Init +4(+6), Perc. +11(+13)

Tomorrow is the start of the weekend for me and posting will be difficult. I have to travel back home for my high school reunion (Saturday night) and then my niece and nephew (twins) have their 8th birthday party on Sunday. I won't be back home until Sunday evening my time. Just giving everyone a heads up. If I am not on that boards and Rain needs to act, then please NPC her in my absence. Thanks. :)

Taldor

Male Elf Magus 3 (AC: 15,12,13; HP: 24; Saves 4,3,4; Init +2, perc +7)

Have fun Rain. Don't worry. Will be sporadic on Saturday as my RL kingmaker campaign is going that day as well.


M kitsune rogue (pirate)/4; bard(sea singer)/2 AC18 (T 16, FF 12); HP 43/53; saves F +2, R +12, W +4; bab: 4; melee 4(+9), ranged +9; CMB 4, CMD 20; speed 30; init +5(+7); perc +9(11)(+13)

same here - playing RL pathfinder on sat and RL 3.5 on sunday... but will find time to post if possible.

Taldor

Male Elf Magus 3 (AC: 15,12,13; HP: 24; Saves 4,3,4; Init +2, perc +7)

Night all...heading to bed.


F Elf Ranger (Freebooter) 4, Inquisitor 2/AC 18/ HP 48/48, F+8 R+6 W+6 (+2 vs Enchantments)/ Init +4(+6), Perc. +11(+13)

Thanks and Night, Variel. And have fun to you and Jiro for your RL games. :)


FLynn's loot suggestion:
Right – just so we’re clear: I’ve been eager to create an equitable way to divide loot in this game. As we aren’t getting coins – but only “special items” – most of which are not tailored to any specific player – we’ll have to debate things like this in the future.

The easiest way I saw to deal with this kind of stuff was basically saying you figure out the net value of an item – then one person gets it, and pays off the rest of his companions equally for the value of the item, until things balance out.

Simply put – there are 7 of us. If we found an item worth 70 gold – and one person claimed it – he would give everyone in the group 10 gold each; this would balance things out. If he didn’t have gold to give – he’d hang onto the item and keep paying out the others with coin later – until things balanced out.

This is already expensive for me – as I currently have a +1 sword – I’d owe you all money for me claiming it. I’ll pay that money, too – for whoever wants to do business equally.

I’ve gamed before – the system is a little cheesy – but it saves a lot of time later, and makes things as fair as possible.

Healing potions would be for the good of the group – first come, first serve – I’d say the same for any potion or scroll we hand out – unless you get to use it multiple times, and it only helps your character (like scribing a scroll into a spellbook) – that’s different. As for things like “raise dead”? If we had two people that die – and had one free “raise dead” and had to pay for another spell like that – bottom line is; those two people would split the cost of the other spell equally, as far as I see it.

Right now I got a couple items worth a few coins on this island. I’m guessing we’ll find more. At the end of the journey – my vote it to tally all the wealth up – then divide it equally. If there is an item someone wants – it comes out of the balance of what they earned equally. Even if all there was to use was stuff for clerics – which none of us are – we could still sell that stuff easily and have money later to share.

I’m open for equal division of treasure – provided we’re all being fair and equal. If people want to play that way – Horatio will do business that way with your characters, if you do that with mine. If you don’t want to do business that way – and it’s “everyone for themselves” – that’s fine, too. I just think that ends up doing more harm than good.

Anyway – that’s my plan with loot I find – split it equally with those who vote to share treasure equally. Those who don’t – that’s fine, too. If you don’t want to share, we don’t have to share; but I’ll share equally with those who want to share with me. Just let me know.

I pulled this off the Social RP thread. I've added them to this thread here, so yea can see it.

I like Flynn's call about how to pass out loot, keeping track of Permanent Items, weapons, Magic items, and armor, etc.

potions
I would like to toss the consumables into a seperate pot, keeping them as community loot that we can pass out. We track it seperatly, everybody getting a portion of the consumable loot passed out by consensus. Cause i would be reluctant to take a potion of invisibility from the pot if it cuts into how many permanent items i can get, but Dropping a potion makes me invisible so i can do all my summoning and not get interrupted, so i can get all the spells off. good for the group. But i would be something like the Mage armor scroll so my personal AC is a bit higher for an encounter

We can sell consumables and toss the into the pot o' gold and divide them out, and use Pot-gold to get consumables.

I don't think anyone would use pot money to get potions that they know the group would give them, avoiding spending their gold at the expense of the group. I can't see Jiro using Group cash to buy a bunch of potions if Inviz so the group would pay for them. If he wanted them he'd buy them for himself. But the ones we find we can vote them to 'em.

Items
My thought an them is we account for the full GP of the items, pay that to the group to use the item. When we put it back into the pot, we get the full price back, sell the item and divide what we make.

I find a +1 sword for 2360 gp. I want to use it, so i pony up that cash and use the item. then we find a better sword, so i get that cash back and put it toward my thundering halbard for 8373gp. So i put up another 6013gp give them the +1 sword which makes up the rest fo the cost. I've paid out my 8373 for group funds for my weapon. Then we sell off the +1 sword for 1180 and pass that cash out to the group, cause I've paid for my weapon, and we have some group cash, so we pass it out.
\
\do the numbers work for that, guys?


M kitsune rogue (pirate)/4; bard(sea singer)/2 AC18 (T 16, FF 12); HP 43/53; saves F +2, R +12, W +4; bab: 4; melee 4(+9), ranged +9; CMB 4, CMD 20; speed 30; init +5(+7); perc +9(11)(+13)

pretty much works for me... i have no objections...


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)

Good times.

If a person needs a potion to heal - that shouldn't be something that is hoarded or judged by money. If someone can use a scroll - I figure the same thing. The only two caveat that I think is worth noting is raising dead. I figure that if we need to pay a priest to raise a person - the group has to pony up the loot for the dead person; but the dead person has to pay back the group. If we have a potion or scroll to raise a person - it should be first come, first serve. If two people die in the same combat and we have only one thing to raise a person, and we have to pay a priest for the second person - I think it's fair if both raised people split the cost for the priest. That's pretty much the only caveat I'd recommend.

But the basic premise is - everything has a coin value. Any item we find is worth "coin" - all we have to do is put the value on it, and make sure that things are divided equally.

That's pretty much all I was suggesting.

As for getting the coin back, the trick is what we sell it for.

Once you get a sword, you paid for it - it's your sword. You can either reinvest into group funds, or you can sell it for personal profit.

That seems reasonable - if you have a contact that gives you a special deal on the sword you bought and paid for - you earned that deal. That's how I see it.


F Elf Ranger (Freebooter) 4, Inquisitor 2/AC 18/ HP 48/48, F+8 R+6 W+6 (+2 vs Enchantments)/ Init +4(+6), Perc. +11(+13)

I'm fine with the division of loot as stated above. No objection here either.


Equal division of loot?! Preposterous! What are we communists?!? ;-)

Sounds like a good plan so far. Who is going to keep track though?

Taldor

Male Elf Magus 3 (AC: 15,12,13; HP: 24; Saves 4,3,4; Init +2, perc +7)

The only thing I would change is that consumable no mattr what they are do not count as loot. This way magical arrows, scrolls, potions, flasks do not count against the person obtaining them.

Anyway to have a link on the campaign page for a loot spreadsheet. I will try and come up with something simple later that we all can use. A repeating set of three columns, loot found and valued divided out, loot value taken, amount owed the party. Third column transfers over each time if necessary.


Male Human Gunslinger 1 (Buccaneer), Fighter 1 (Lore Warden), Bard 4 (Archaeologist) - (AC 18 / HP 49 / F +6, R + 9, W +6 / Ini + 3 / Perc. +12)

The spreadsheet sounds interesting, but what did you mean about the idea regarding the consumables not counting as loot?

The only reason I suggested that was because I'm not how to divide a potion among the group. Does the person who needs healing have to pay for it, for example?

This does touch on a question we've all talked about before, when it comes to healing, though.

As we have no specific cleric in the party heal us - either as player or NPC - we have had to endure quite a lot of "loot" in the form of potions of healing. That is nice, to be sure, but once you drink it - that's it - gone, and no more.

You can't sell it, you can't "upgrade it" - so it makes things frustrating. Should you use the extremely expensive potion this round, or gamble that you'll live - because what if you drink a "cure moderate" potion and only receive 6 Hp in healing - that was not only a waste - but as far as general loot goes - you've basically wasted a tremendous amount of money for a potion that didn't do much - and you can't 'reuse it" - it's already finished off.

Anyway, the reason I suggested that "one hit wonders" would be something that is "company funds", as it were, was because if we acted as a team, any item we use is theoretically for the team's good. If we had given Jiro that potion of invisibility, and he had used it, he may have learned some valuable information that could have benefited everyone in the party. But as soon as he used it - then no one in the party could have. Maybe if he had saved all of those extremely expensive potions we might have found a person to buy them off of us and just sell us a "ring of invisibility" - which wouldn't disappear after one use.

But Variel, I'm not arguing with your idea - but I am curious on your reasons that someone getting a potion would have to pay for a one use item. I'd like to understand it better, if you wouldn't mind explaining a little more on your motivations.

One other thing - this "equal sharing" bit can only work if the players are open and up-front. If I know other players are getting stuff and keeping it from my character, even meta-game knowledge, that kind of ruins the determination to keep things "equal and fair" on my part. If you see me keep hiding stuff for just me, I think it will ruin the plan, because you'll know out of game I would be cheating you, and that's hard to deal with, even for the best players.

And if trying to work as a team or sharing openly and equally isn't how our characters would really act, my other opinion is "too fracking bad". We're here to have fun, not fight with each other simply because it's "what our characters would do". But anyway - that's just my opinion.


Horatio, that's actually what Variel was saying, at least from how I read what he wrote. He just took it one step further and was saying that ALL consumables shouldn't be considered as counting against a persons wealth not just potions and scrolls, but ammunition such as arrows that multiple people can use etc.

I would guess that includes poisons as well.

701 to 750 of 3,253 << first < prev | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Online Campaigns / Play-by-Post Discussion / DM Immortal's Blood Red Roses: A Skull & Shackles Campaign (Discussion) 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.