williamoak's page

I tried to run a Rogue Trader game inspired by duck tales. Didnt work out as planned, but Scrooge McDuck is a great example of a rogue trader.

I've come up with a ridiculous idea for a first starfinder campaign:

The players are part of a goverment anticorruption group who have a goal of infliltrating high society in order to find the most corrupt. Their plan to infiltrate high society: become a galactic-level rock band and get super rich.

It would be a very silly campaign

I feel your pain, M.D. I love playing dungeon crawls. That's how I started out and would love to play in one again. My players aren't fond of them, however. I've also been the primary DM/GM for 30 years now, and get to be a player maybe 4 times a year, though that has picked up a *little* this year.

I would be interested in seeing a dungeon crawl (assuming it made plot sense), with the right group. I've been having a lot of fun with a shadowrun group that is organised, logical and very disciplined. I would want to run in a dungeon crawl with such serious operators. I would not want to play a dungeon crawl with a bunch of murderhoboes (and the groups I have played with were just messes).

Actually, I do have some ideas for an entire dungeon-crawl campaign... but I would rather play than run that to be honest.

Yeah, I generally get five players, so that if 2 flake, I've still got enough people to consider it "the group"

Evil snow white. The general idea would be that when she was poisoned, snow white caught the attention of asmodeus, who offered her vengeance in exchange for her soul. So he killed the evil queen, and came to "kiss" her awake under the shape of a prince. Since then, she wanders the land under the guise of goodness, manipulating people in the service of her master.
She would be a sorcerer/diabolist with the infernal bloodline.
She will take all damnation feets (for evil, of course

as well as Eldritch heritage (arcane), for an imp familiar; combined with the imp companion, they would polymorph into small birds and sing around her.

She would also take wicked leadership to get a Kitsune Ninja cohort who would turn into a fox.

In the end, she would be a beautiful (and damned) young sorceress, who is followed by wild animals and sings, impossible to identify as evil... by level 15, thanks to the damnation feats, she would be an actual outsider.

Oh! And ideally, to fit with the lawful evil thing, she would never lie. But she would dissemble, change the subject, and avoid ever telling the whole truth.

I'll post more ideas soon, I have a buttload.

High int and wisdom in a system that seems to only reward melee types and has no spellcasting whatsoever and a brain that fails concentration rolls every time I try has been frustrating, to say the least...

Seems like Charisma is the primary stat in meatspace...

"GOD DAMMIT, STOP MIN-MAXING! Stop dumping charisma AND giving me social disadvantages..."

Just get him to talk about the plot or his homebrew world a little and act like you're totally enamored with it.

Positive reinforcement and operant conditioning aren't just for teaching pets tricks. They're great for subtlety brainwashing folks over time.

Most GMs get burned out because they don't feel appreciated by their players for all their work. I know that was my primary reason. I bust my hump all week writing, building stat blocks, custom tweaks designed just for you, and such, and you can't level up one stinking character during a week of off time and have the nerve to argue with me about a ruling for thirty minutes? F*** you, I'm done.

Appreciation goes a long way to stave off burn out.

I can appreciate that. I'm currently ending a campaign early, and one of the reason is because the players have 0 engagement. In my other campaigns, the players where motivated, would give me ideas about what they wanted, what they where like. THey gave me most of my inspiration for the game. Here... seriously disappointed.

Which is also (oddly) a reason I stopped a lot of games; since they played at night (and I was always tired, I'm a day person), I was never fully engaged and was not great fun. I've found a sunday game and I am infinitely more engaged and interested.

So yeah, love your GM and your GM will love ya back. They are a player too, and showing them you want to play (both in play and without) is hugely motivating.

Actually, I'm talking about people as young as 25 and as old as 50, so it pretty much spreads the gamut.

As I said, the ONLY consistency among these people is their hobby and their flakiness.

Eh, I see it more as a "people" thing. Most people I know are VERY flaky. As somebody who has been trying to organise more social activities, most people are flaky with everything that isnt "core" to them. It sucks, but it's normal. I still do get pissed when I organize something and 1 out of the 6 "confirmed" show up.

Needless to say, it's a question of what game is being played - and also needless to say, there's a difference between people who are good at math and people who know nothing else, or have a cult-like faith in its infallible omniscience.

But if you can reduce the game to a predictable formula...why bother? Pack it in, you've killed it. It's stone dead. It's a stiff. It's run down the curtain and joined the Choir Invisible....

Well, I dont quite think so. Like I said, it's not auto-win, it's just a higher probability. The random nature removes all possibility of auto-win scenarios. And if someone plays against someone at the same level, it's very impressive. I mean professional sports is basically that; take the "best" possible human players, the best possible strategists/coaches, and pit them against each other. Yes, a pro team will (almost) always beat an amateur one (and it will look quite boring as well), but pro vs pro can be quite interesting.

Cult like faith in it's omniscience is dumb however. This is statistical analysis, not calculus. There is no "solve for victory". You may win 70% of your games, but losing should be expected. Then again, asshats are too common to discount... sigh.

Tinkergoth wrote:

Oh they're having fun, and it works for them. During a recent tournament where one of the creators of the game came over from the UK to play, they thrashed him mercilessly. He went on record saying he's pretty sure the first world champion is going to be an Australian after what he saw. One of the local guys has won every tournament bar one that has been held here, he's a world class Warmachine/Hordes player as well, and is very much a fan of mathematical/statistical analysis of the game. The problem is that it's no fun for casual players like me.

It's kinda like, bean-counters are never the first ones to catch on to a game, but they sniff a game out, they barge in, and ruin it for everyone with a broader mind than they. Game gradually turns to s#&#, it shrivels up, they stand in the ruins, shrug their shoulders, and decide it was inevitable, because obviously if they couldn't have saved the game, nobody could! It's almost exactly what happened to World of Warcraft, plus the "LCD Welcome!" thing.

What's to be done? When will they yield, rather than the rest of us?

I think this is more of a "different mentality" thing than anything else. You derive fun from something broader; they derive fun from victory & statistical analysis. In the end, people who want to win (and put the effort to do so) will always end up pushing aside those without the same ambition (and this isnt just in games; you can go into any field (business, engineering, politics, etc.) and find similar mindsets). I wouldnt be surprised they have similar attitudes towards "casuals" (like the reaction on the web to "casual" VG players), wondering why "they dont play the game properly" (IE statistically, to win).

The only solution I have found... is avoidance. They want something COMPLETELY different from the game that some do. I'm not competitive myself, and so I avoid these kinds of people. Luckily, I havent met many of them.

Steve Geddes wrote:

PBP is a struggle for me too. Ironically, compared to live gaming, I find myself much less focussed on the story/roleplaying and more on getting the mechanics right and not making dumb decisions. I always feel like I'm doing it badly... :/

That was my biggest problem. We play a little fast and loose with some of the rules, so I was always making some mistake that the GM had to point out. The GM was great, don't get me wrong. The problem was all me.

Ah, PbP never worked for me either. I just... couldnt get into it. I always finished by forgetting it was even there...

...

The players have a hell of a lot of influence. Player investment has a huge effect on my motivation in-game.

I often find a theme for the character, find an appropriate language, and find a word that fits the theme.

-The lost isle (would not work in pathfinder): All the players wake up on an island, remebering only their name. It's up to the players to act, whether to explore or to flee.

-The ring of the ancients: essentially stargate SG1 in pathfinder. The players would start in an all-human fantasy world, do a few basic adventures. Eventually, they would be sent to investigate monsters coming out of an old ruin. At the center they discover a great glowing ring from which come the monsters. Then they must decide what to do about it; I would push the leadership to try to do a "stargate SG1" type setup. Drow as Goaould, Elves as tokra, etc.

-Arcane academy: the players start as children in a magical school with nothing but cantrips. The game would be about making the most of cantrips basically (but would need invested and creative players).

-Cinder claws: basically a christmas themed "we be goblins" with kobolds and their red dragon master (cinder claws)

-Xelbaba's lair (short campaign): this would all be about a heist game. THe goal would be to break into the lair of a lich (xelbaba) who has not been paying their taxes for the last few centuries. The goal of the game is to steal the back taxes (about 1000k gp) from various items from the lair, whithout being killed.

Psychic parasite campaign (have a friend interested in this one): You play as an intellect devourer. Your goal is to save your community from aboleth (or some other underdark threat) by getting "up-worlders" to do the work for you. You wouldnt gain levels, but you COULD steal the bodies of more and more powerful creatures, and using their powers. (would need a lot of new rules).

Woo! I think of more frequently, but these are my weirdest

So for me it depends entirely on the group.

Group dynamics are important. Guess I havent had any luck yet on finding a group I give well with. I'm a "day" rather than night person myself, which makes most groups (who play nights) rather difficult; when you're already exhausted, it's hard to have fun. Need to find day groups (which are exceedingly rare).

My players seem to have fun at least, so I guess that's something. Keep it coming folks.

Play acting is not necessarily roleplaying. Ignoring one aspect of mechanics in the book doesn't make you a superior gamer. Suggesting that using those rules makes someone a child or anything else is insulting though.

Look, I dont think BigDTbone was trying to be insulting (though he might have failed his diplomacy roll... hehe). I've known some a$%*~~@s that do, but he seems to simply want to present the difficulty in finding games with expectations that match one's capacity.

Even play-acting aint enough. I can play-act, but if you can convince the GM of the quality of your argument & you cant use rolls, you are basically playing with your own charisma.

Were we not talking about substituting Diplomacy checks for the roleplaying?

The situation has become... mixed up. My own problem is that many GMs remove rolls altogether in social situations and make us play with our own charisma (which aint high for many of us).

I've tried to adapt. I feel normal people (people without AS) are all part of a secret club with all kinds secret looks, handshakes, ect that I will never be able to be a part of.

Hard to adapt when everything you try to do to adapt does not work.

I thought part of the fun of RPGs is to be able to play people that you would'nt have the ablity to play in real life.

Unless you have a form of HFA that prohibits you and the other players do nothing to help you change that.

I understand the feel. I'm not on the spectrum, but I still have one hell of a hard time reading people & forming relationships. People be hard. I'm better than I used to be (lot's of practice & having good people around) but I am in no way qualified to be a face. Jaelithe makes some good points; though it's unfortunate that those who may want to help you dont know how any more than yourself (I'm convinced there is some "learning" I missed about being social at a certain point that everyone else knows subconsciously, and thus cant transmit).

In any case, good luck finding a group you can play with man. I've played with half a dozen groups since I started (a couple of years ago) and nothing ever feels quite right, so hold on!

...

Well, I dont want to get into an argument (since they never go well on the internet). And I agree, it being the only reliable group isnt a great excuse, but it is the reason I'm still with them and trying to work things out.

But, to continue your analogy a little, I see trpg s as if what was being advertised to play was "ball". Nothing more specific. Could be baseball, teeball, basketball for all I know. The wild variety of what a game can be is staggering, and nearly impossible to sum up.

At least with sports you can immediately tell what's being played; It took me nearly a year and a half of play (which was highly combat & exploration based) before that social aspect became apparent.

Anyway, clearly setting expectations is hard, and making them explicit can be even harder.

...

I dont mind the whole acting part, but it's the fact that the sheet doesnt seem to matter at all that's a problem. I do act out what I say, first person (I love accents), trying to stick to a character. But everything I say seems to get the most negative reaction I would expect, so I'm getting rather frustrated.

It's the only reliable group I've got unfortunately, and I think I'm just gonna have to tell them to figure out their own face stuff. I've got the stats (and that was more an accident than anything else), so I try, but clearly that aint important here.

Anyway, I've got to talk to my GM, he tends to listen so hopefully we can work something out (or I'll just stop talking altogether).

And for the "solutions", I'M not talking about this group, but in general. What kind of framework can we make so that folks that arent socially adept (but are still willing) can participate in "in game" social conflict through their characters without feeling constrained by their own abilities? I think it's a serious concern for a hobby centered around being what you arent usually (in this case, socially adept).

So, most forms of actions in RPGs are abstractions upon the real world, based on PC abilities. You roll to hit (based on strength BaB, WS or whatever), you roll to succeed (at crafting, lock picking, etc.) and you roll to know (knowledge checks and such). You get no bonuses for being a good fighter in RL, you don’t need to be a carpenter in RL to do carpentry in game, and your personal knowledge shouldn’t enter into play (and for many pre-made settings this can be an issue). So why isn’t this always the case for the “social” aspect of skills in-game?

I’m currently playing a priest/investigator type named Johan. He’s got the best charisma (or equivalent for the system) in the group, and has the right skills to play the role of a “face”. I, however, most definitely do not. Not that I can’t talk to people, but I react slowly, am not always the most diplomatic, and could definitely never play a face in real life. And this is a big problem. Why? Because the “social” stuff in the game (with NPCs mind you) is always done more as a freeform discussion. The only (rare) time that a roll is needed is to gage the reaction of an NPC (sense motive or equivalent) or to lie to an NPC (bluff or equivalent). So I bumble along, and I get the impression the other players get quite frustrated at me sometimes, either for not asking something appropriate, or timing it right, or so forth.

In the end, I feel like I have to use my (as in, the players) charisma & skills rather than the characters, which makes me rather frustrated. I would love to role-play a “face” type, but I’m feeling that without having the skills myself, I won’t get the chance. This has happened in each campaign I have tried to play a “face” (3 up to now).
(There are other things that impact my performance: I’m always fairly mind-tired when it’s after work play, but that affects my performance in all aspects of the game, not just the social.)
Let’s compare to a skill I am good at (in this case, knowledge, since this is a pre-made setting). We are using a pre-made setting, which I know moderately well (I gm another game in the same setting too). And I have, with GM approval, used this knowledge in character (mainly for stuff like backstory, some “general knowledge”). I have no compunctions discussing the stuff at the table, but I am very careful not to let it affect my character’s actions.

I’m also worried about this as a GM. My own current standard is “Roleplay it, you roll a proper check, with possible bonuses/negatives depending on how good an idea it was, though it will always mostly rely on your stats”. But it still worries me, because it’s not an easy thing to do, and I don’t want to start balkanizing people out of the face role.

So I’m wondering what other GMs have done in this situation. There’s bound to be a solution, but I have yet to found a solidly built “social interaction/conflict” system, so I’m looking to everyone else. How do you manage those situations where someone would like to play a face but isnt one themselves?

48) Necromantic Mecha/Heavy armor: Take an (unusually) large skeleton (like a mammoth). Cover it with metal plates. Fill it with soldiers & a controling necromancer, and voila: Necromantic AT-AT!

(Note: I've been working on a "Necrotech" setting idea, and a bunch of these things are going in the catalogue of "Necrotech Industries")

We have little time for such baubles! Onward with the hunt!

I just love existential comics. They also have several "philosophers play D&D". You should just see Georg Cantor and Kurt Godel trying to calculate their probability of success, pissing off Dostoyevsky.

I would reccomend the "warhammer 40k" systems, like rogue trader, dark heresy, etc. Each has a different theme.

Hello folks,

So, for a campaign I'm playing I'm trying to create a "special forces" unit specialized in countering magical threats. This can include:

-Casters (both divine & arcane)
-Constructs
-Magical Artillery

Now, there are a few limits I'm posing on myself:

-The members of the army cannot be casters
-They can use magical items/swords

I've started collecting a few classes that can work with these themes:

-Purity Legion Enforcer (to fight divine casters)
-Superstitious spell sunder barbarian
-"Disruptive" fighter
-Martial artist monk (can ignore DR/Hardness of constructs)
-Untouchable bloodrager (arcane bloodline)

I'm looking for specialized archetypes that could work for such an antimagic army. I'm curious of what you folks think.

You know what grinds my gears? That there isnt a spell called "Grinding gears".

Oh, and "I feed on your hate, etc., etc. "...

Malwing wrote:

I like a lot of third party books and some of them I feel are indispensable however almost every group I've had lately either don't have the system mastery to not get paralyzed by the options, are phobic about third party balance or just aren't up to using it. When I play it's worse due to fear of using something horribly unbalanced.

I mean cohesion by exclusion IS a thing. As a Gm, you are the final arbitrator of what is appropriate for you game. Sometimes it's a lot of fun to exclude something that people normally take for granted!

I tend to agree with that. My own games tend to be very "theme-based"; I've run an all-dwarf campaign, and my current campaign has only a few racial choices. I like running games with specific intent let's say.

And speaking of your article, I DO have a basic write-up for a savage barbaric game. Dont know if I'll ever play but heh! It's got the basic prep done in case I get interested players...

I like a lot of third party books and some of them I feel are indispensable however almost every group I've had lately either don't have the system mastery to not get paralyzed by the options, are phobic about third party balance or just aren't up to using it. When I play it's worse due to fear of using something horribly unbalanced.

I've gotta say, this isnt for me as a player, but for me as a GM. I really like books that might not give much player options, but have cool advice for systems a GM can use.

Does computer gaming count? What about board/card games with strong RPG elements? What about tabletop RPGs that are completely different from D&D/Pathfinder?

Utter unpredictability. It is LONG to get a group up to level 10 (much less to level 20), and you never know what they might do.

I have never wiped a party (as a GM).

So recently I've been looking at a bunch of third-party goodness to spice up my games. So I was wondering if folks had found some weird stuff in their time, while posting a few of their own. Odd rules you would never have thought of yourself, interesting stuff to spice up games or just general weirdness, I'm quite interested. I'll start it off:

- Dynasties & Demaguoges : bought recently, quite digging it for the moment. I had been a bit lost about more "political" campaigns, and there are a bunch of good tips here.

-Book of erotic fantasy : I know, this is a classical "joke" third party book, but I find it interesting for longer-term games where reproduction might come into play, with table on fertility rates & such. The only really awful thing in the book is the art (OH GOD the art).

- Leadership Handbook : A nice book to spice up leadership and get more use out of it, some weird abilities & such. I havent had the chance to use it yet, but I plan to!

Well I am quite excited to see what other people have liked!

I did some checking around, and the only source for d&d pdfs I could find is here:

DnD classics

From what I can see, not too bad a site, but they sell the PDFs at paper book prices (Except when on sale, which seems to be the case right now) so it aint tempting. And apparently they canceled a bunch of plans for 5e e-book release midway through the production.

I understand the desire they have to protect their copyright, though I'm doubtful as to it's ability to drum up business. Considering the additional cost of entry into the hobby, I can only see this as being a way to sell to nostalgic folk.

And as TheBlackPlague said, it's a big loss to the community; arguably the most expansive RPG ever not longer has any kind of comprehensive encyclopedia (and considering the sheer number of feats, classes races & spells, I can understand the need).

In any case, WoTC was within their rights, it's just disappointing that they decide to exercise these, and while I dont predict much of a negative effect on them (they arent relying on 3.5 anymore), it may get even more folks to pathfinder (Yay?!).

These are all good points. Do goblins love their children like other civilized humanoids? What I'm saying is, if you strapped goblin children to your shields, would goblins stop attacking you? Because I'm totally trying that.

I've got a GM who plays goblins as complete A-holes; whenever they see one of their compatriots in a compromising position, they start whacking. Once had a goblin spend an entire battle hitting another goblin who had gotten stuck in a snare trap.

I'd love to get this, but the shipping costs for non-americans tend to be prohibitive. Does anyone know anywhere this can be bought (legally) as a PDF?

Forget it, I'm an idiot, hadnt noticed the banner said PDF...

Yup, I am definitly going to have a crazy vermin druid launch a cone of lobsters on my players in the upcoming weeks!

Hello all,

I'm in a silly mood, so I feel like making a list of all pathfinder spells that are a little "silly/funny". Here we go:

-Mad monkeys: a swarm of thieving monkeys.

-Vomit swarm: I dont know why, but my players laugh up a storm at every mention of vomit swarm. They even proposed a "strategy" of casting vomit swarm while kissing someone to infest them with spiders. They laughed themselves silly.

-Strangling hair: to be murdered by one's hair is a hilarious thing.

-Detect toughts : a "copper" (material component) for your thoughts has always made me chuckle.

So, paizonians? Any other pathfinder spells that make you chuckle?

The "mysterious stranger" gunslinger can be decent, with the given boosts to cha & dex.

I am also curious.

Urgak sound like an interesting idea. Will have to adapt for my setting, but could be funny.

Hello all,

Does anyone have interesting city encounter tables? My next month or so of games are going to happen in a city, and I was looking for some stuff. Not just monsters though, weird stuff would be cool as well. I was sure there was some sort of "101 weird urban encounters" thread a while back, but I cant track it down...

One thing I think would be odd: just weird proportions. Like chairs with short legs & strangely long backs. Uncomfortable door handles made for alien hands. I guess this is all in the GMs description, but I think it could be interesting nonetheless.

Most of my bards tend to be dancers or singers, rather than instrument players. Though I have been tempted on multiple occasions to do the whole axe/guitar combo thing.

I had the idea of a "morningstar mandolin" at a certain point; an iron mandolin the back of which would be covered in spikes.

Did you know it's illegal to tie a camel to a light post in Georgia? ;)

I heard something along those lines... Now that I think of it, I'll try to do a proper write-up of the campaign. The setting would be limited (one city & countryside), a few main features (office, home, town square, etc.) with module-like "case files" ranging from easy to impossible... this could be interesting.

Chyrone wrote:

Could you PM it please?

Liranys wrote:

PM'd you two links. :) Enjoy.

Me as well please.

ME THREE! I'm working on a list of silly magic items for a "comedic" pathfinder campaign.

Magical Item: Necro-Gnome Icon - A small Gnome figurine dressed in sorcerer's clothing. With the command word "Jinkies" 5 HD worth of Zombies will be summoned. However, these Zombies are uncontrollable unless a Control Undead spell is used after they are summoned. If Item is used and no Control Undead spell is cast, roll percentiles. On a 1-45, Zombies attack the party, on a 46-89, Zombies attack the nearest non-party member. On a 90 or above, Zombies ignore everyone else around them and tear each other to shreds.

I definitly using this in my list of silly magic items.

Aaron Bitman wrote:

I was, in fact, about to make a comment like "What book describes that, the Necrognomicon?" but you ninja'd me.

LOL I appear to be good at that. :)

Hehehe... now I'm convinced the necronomicon should be written on Gnome skin. I was going more for an alliteration with "metronome", but yours is WAY better.

I was thinking that this bard necromancer would be using his bardic performance to play music, inspiring courage for his undead allies, and the crawling hands could boost the Inspire Courage ability by accompanying the music.

Da-da-da-dum. <Snap! Snap!>
Da-da-da-dum. <Snap! Snap!>
Da-da-da-dum, da-da-da-dum, da-da-da-dum. <Snap! Snap!>

Well, there is the "Dirge Bard" archetype which would be perfect for that. Make it a Gnome, and you've got yourself a Necro-gnome.

The IP Burglar wrote:

So we got vamps and wights that'll drain their levels, mind flayers that will eat their brains, eldritch abominations that will eat their sanity, rust monsters to eat their metal, carrion crawlers to eat their flesh, and thieves to steal their gold. But how about something that will take something even dearer to them: IDEAS! Steal their hopes, dreams, thoughts, goals, inventions, discoveries, creativity, and you'll leave them a miserable mindless husk. Fun times all around.

I'm pretty sure one of the psionics books from 3.5 had a monster that was a Thought Eater or something like that.

This makes me want to run a campaign where all players are intellect devourers. They couldnt level up, but they COULD posses stronger and stronger hosts...