Jubal: First off, thanks for GMing up to this point, especially after planning to play for a while and getting roped back in to the GM role with an adventure you didn't choose. Second, I'd agree with the assessment that anywould have trouble with this scenario. Even at the table this would be tough, but PbP it is doubly so. This is a very railroady set of scenarios (as both you and Hobwise stated) and those always increase player and GM frustration.
Hobwise: I'm up for continuing however the group would like. Not knowing the rest of this specific adventure, i don't know if it would be better to keep going or try to simply cut out and move on to something better suited to PbP and this group's style. My guess, given the design to this point, is we are better off either truncating this substantially or retconning something to avoid further railroading and frustration. But again I'm open to any of the options.
I have a course which maintains aspects of the current module while giving the players freedom they otherwise would not have had. It seems appropriate; even though the module contains events which are living history we cannot change, we have obviously already changed it by being a part of it and forcing NPCs to interact with us. We are not ghosts they cannot see. Therefore, we can modify the path as long as the destination is the same.
I will be posting as GM Therenger going forward. No need to do anything else yet - I'll reset the stage in the next day or so in the Gameplay thread.
Thanks Hobwise
Sorry everyone. I tried my best.
cheers
No worries, Jubal. Best wishes for your move! Please stay connected, as the module will be changing considerably compared to the source material you are familiar with, and Éothain's contributions will be a welcome addition to the current action.
GM Therenger's Manifesto:
I will endeavor to follow these commandments.
Three player qualities in particular will be lavishly praised and rewarded: Consistency, Ingenuity, and Fearlessness. Most of us on this campaign are able to post daily. If you want to post more frequently, say to engage a NPC in 1-on-1 dialog, I am totally game. I have a home office and I write business reports for a living, which frequently allows for 15 seconds to 5 minutes of not-exactly-downtime while queries execute. If I'm not already doing something else, I will check these games for new activity. Also, if you'll be offline for a few days, please let us all know. I have a two-day rule: no new activity or heads up for 2 days and I'll look to push the action. We'll see how that works.
Regarding Ingenuity, if I don't explicitly mention Chekhov's gun, that doesn't mean it's not there. We're playing (mostly) written material, which I consider the framework only of an expansive and infinitely detailed world which we all share responsibility to create. Expect to be rewarded with XP and/or Inspiration for posts which uniquely and intriguingly enrich the roleplaying experience. I will never tl;dr your prose, and walls of text are not forbidden here.
As for Fearlessness, I roleplay by one mantra: Never Tell Me the Odds / I Don't Believe in a No-Win Scenario (which is why I found the written content in this module frustrating.) Generally speaking, if your inclination is to Go Boldly, that is exactly my style. Acts of great bravery, so long as it is not blatantly reckless or endangers other party members, are appreciated and may also be rewarded with bonus XP. This pairs nicely with Ingenuity; leverage the environment, be creative, and don't shy away from risk. And I do understand reserved characters - everything is relative.
Finally, a mechanical comment specific to this campaign: I like the feeling that I am improving at something. In game terms that translates to XP. Since we just flipped to 4th level, everyone please add a line to your character Profile for Experience Points and set it at 2,700. The group will gain XP at all appropriate opportunities. As noted above, XP may be rewarded for excellent and clever roleplaying, a purely subjective metric. That means some players will advance slightly more quickly than others (and that's the way it was and we liked it!). Please don't take offense, and please contact me via PM if you have any concerns or frustrations. About anything.
P.S. Characters will incur Exhaustion according to the rules. Fair warning. ;)
@Jubal: to be clear, you GMing is appreciated. It can be a taxing role.
@Therenger: That's quite a clear outline, and I look forward to seeing that in action. I don't object to varying xp. As for availability, I can post on most days, and usually give warning if I can't.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can we switch to another adventure for our PC levels? Like a reboot? If the one with the dream sequence "doesn't make sense" or would lead to a TPK?
A long time ago, there was a DM named Todd. Atlas (Thorgrim) and I were pawns in Todd's Temple of Elemental Evil campaign. It started when we were high school juniors and went on for two long years. Every time the party would leave the Temple, Todd would immediately restock it with trolls, ettins, and the like, so that getting through the front door was always a test. A very boring test. One day, Todd decided to kill the party. Evidently, he was bored with the test too. We all hate Todd.
As we get started, probably late today or tomorrow, I may write, "two paths are plain," or something similar. There are at least two paths, and you may see one that I don't.
I borrowed an hour from myself and got things restarted. We are live!
I'm finally going through and updating / reformatting my character sheet. Would it be acceptable to keep most of the info on a google document, and embed a link to it on my profile? Would that work?
Do we get to reroll 1s when updating our HP, or should we keep it?
Do we get to reroll 1s when updating our HP, or should we keep it?
We keep 1s unless otherwise specified in the rules, but no matter what you role for HP, I give you option to instead take the default per your Class Hit Dice. 1d8 is 5, etc.
Sweet, thanks : )
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Notes on Combat:
If we were all sitting at a table together, you each could roll Initiiative for your own character. In PbP, as much as I prefer to own that roll for my PC, it is an obvious roadblock to the action. At the beginning of combat I will roll Initiative for each player, alphabetically by character name, and then roll for the enemy. Players win ties with the enemy.
There were some things I picked up from DM Jubal on the way he ran combat that I really like, including incorporating player's flavor text, but more importantly, how he allowed players to write posts out of turn but then apply results in Initiative order in practical way so that no successful attack was wasted. I also liked the way he did damage; as a player I always felt my character could take X more hits, which allowed me the freedom to continue to press my attack. Far from metagaming, I think a fighter knows when an opponent's blows hurt and when they don't. I will treat bosses differently from pawns, however.
Finally, your enemy may not always be driven only by bloodlust to kill you or die trying. Immediately before I got into the game the party had a prisoner to deal with. I enjoyed reading each of your approaches to dealing with that prisoner. As heroic characters, we are often compromised into rationalizing our behaviors for expediency/convenience. That may result in Shadow points. In general, be vigilant against wickedness, for the Shadow will exploit such indulgences.
On with the show!
@GM Therenger: I like that you are detailing your thoughts on GMing in general and for this campaign in particular.
I appreciate the comment. We're all equal partners in this adventure and I want to try to set clear expectations up front. I would also love to know about other experiences people have and ideas to improve this game and how it can be better GM'd. I'm always looking to earn XP.
Map of Haycombe
1 sq = 30 ft
E2 = The Inn
E5 = Stables
Someone please confirm you can access this. Nothing from Paizo yet on making me the Owner of the campaign.
Certainly. And I can see the map.
Anar, jump in any time.
I've a business trip until Wednesday. Please bot as necessary.
cheers
Btw, Anar has a lot going on outside of Paizo and will not be rejoining us. We have an excellent group here so let's see how well the team of 5 plays and if there is a gap in some talent we can look to recruit.
That's unfortunate.
We do indeed, so let's give it a go. :)
|
Meh. 5E is obviously chasing the 'rules lite' moniker, and I'd say they've accomplished their mission, while still having a fine RPG.
I can imagine a discussion meeting where up on the board they've got:
1) Shooting into melee gives Disadvantage
2) Flanking gives Advantage
Then someone says "How about we just get rid of both of these and call it even?"
Yeah, but if you do a funny dance, or fart loudly, or say, "Hey, what's that?" and "distract" the foe that is in mortal combat with another hero, roll as often as you like!
If I were to have a house rule on this, it would be that the second hero into the fight with an opponent that is already engaged in melee is the one that gets advantage, instead of the way it is written. It makes sense that if you apprach from behind, you should get that benefit.
So in all of the attacks so far, Haleth is the one that would have been attacking with Advantage. Yeah, I like that. ;)
Everyone, I'd like to collaborate on a house rule for flanking. We'll finish the current battle with the ad-hoc rule Thorgrim made up, but I think we should come to a consensus.
A few thoughts I have: While it's a lot of fun for the player benefitting from advantage, it's not fun for the other players who may be struggling with too-hit rolls. Do only melee players benefit? That would seem an enormous disparity.
Consider too that if you are allowed advantage on flanking, then the enemy may also make use of tactics to get advantage against you. In the current combat, all things being equal, Anar would have been dead in round one and those 3 Easterlings would have ganged up on the next person. Seeing Thorgrim as the biggest threat, Thorgrim would likely have been hacked to pieces by a quartet of bad guys weilding advantage. I don't want to be a killer GM, but a flanking advantage rule almost makes it a necessity otherwise you're just playing a video game here. And with flanking advantage in place, any potential combat could boil down to which side has numbers.
Lastly, a flanking advantage rule blows up the value of running a thief character, who's only useful trait is Sneak Attack.
Flanking advantage may be realistic but not practical for a combat engine. Those are just my concerns off the top of my head. Please share your thoughts!
|
|
Everyone, I'd like to collaborate on a house rule for flanking. We'll finish the current battle with the ad-hoc rule Thorgrim made up,
...but but but...It's in the book!
As far as making up more rules go, I think you answered your own questions here:
Consider too that if you are allowed advantage on flanking, then the enemy may also make use of tactics to get advantage against you. In the current combat, all things being equal, Anar would have been dead in round one and those 3 Easterlings would have ganged up on the next person. Seeing Thorgrim as the biggest threat, Thorgrim would likely have been hacked to pieces by a quartet of bad guys weilding advantage. I don't want to be a killer GM,
The PCs are almost invariably outnumbered. Without a table-top with which to create imaginative maps with terrain, etc, the scenario you describe would be the rule, and combat would either be deadly, or waaaaay too complicated for PbP, or both.
And, as you say, -only- rogues get the Advantages which is one (of the few) reasons to play a rogue.
Speaking of which...we need a rogue. I'd do it, but with my weapon, it makes more sense for me to rush Warrior levels. And it wouldn't make sense for Findegil because "paladin".
Hence...Cereidh or Amalina? Would either of you mind dipping one level of rogue for access to the needful things? It's conceivably in the wheelhouse for both of you. If not, that's fine, just thought I'd get the question out there.
but but but...It's in the book!
Not exactly. It says another character can "distract" the opponent, and while I agree on principle that a good way to distract an opponent is to stab him in the back of the head, the rules almost go out of their way to specifically exclude attacks from such measures.
I am open to this, but please also address the concern about archers not gaining the benefit (unless they are also rogues), and that the enemy should also benefit from this rule.
As for PCs being outnumbered, combat should be balanced or it's not fun. If you fight an equal number of 1st level enemies, that's not fun. If you fight an equal number of 201th level enemies... I think there is risk in doing advantage this way because balancing numbers becomes a lot more difficult for a GM to determine. I consider the current engagement a balanced fight, but if the Easterlings were able to gang up on you guys with advanatge, it would be sooooo over.
Speaking of which...we need a rogue.
We expect to have another player joining us after the current module. She may not be inclined to run a rogue but you could mention it.
Wow. Therenger. You already took the Gamemaster control of the game, too.
Anar PMed me and asked to be removed from the game.
We finally have Internet in the house.
cheers
I might consider a dip into rogue. I'll have to see what the middle earth rules equivalent looks like.
As for flanking, I think it might be easiest to just include it under the Help action. The one doing the 'help' engages the foe drawing their attention, but can't really attack themselves. Then one other player (the person doing the help designates who) gets advantage on their attack(s) against that foe.
Seems like that would maintain balance because one person gains advantage but there is one less attack overall as well.
Just my thoughts, happy to try whatever.
|
|
but but but...It's in the book!Not exactly. It says another character can "distract" the opponent, and while I agree on principle that a good way to distract an opponent is to stab him in the back of the head, the rules almost go out of their way to specifically exclude attacks from such measures.
Amalina basically summed it up.
Old DND rules: 2 people attack, and, with position, there are TWO attacks BOTH with bonuses.
New Rule: For a 2v1. Not so dependent on position, but there is only ONE attack, at Advantage.
This makes combat less dependent on numbers (you can still get a bonus, but someone has to give up an attack) and more flexibility. (As we see, even useless NPC, can contribute in a meaningful way, instead of just swinging and missing over and over again.
I am open to this, but please also address the concern about archers not gaining the benefit (unless they are also rogues), and that the enemy should also benefit from this rule.
No, archers can get it too. If DudeGuy is in melee, and wants to impress ArcherChick because she is hot, he has the option of giving up his attack to make her attack have better odds. (We all know guys who would do this.)
Um, yeah, if two enemies are fighting me, and, instead of having two attacks, one wants to have only one attack at Advantage, by all means. (This is actually LESS effective than just rolling two attacks.)
I asked the new player about dipping rogue. They were...disinclined to acquiesce to our request.
Thank you Amalina.
Anar PMed me and asked to be removed from the game.
He asked me as well but Paizo was dragging their feet giving me GM permissions. I actually only got it yesterday morning and made the appropriate updates. The Dwarf still needs to exit the story in a way that makes sense. Call me a stickler. Luckily, the Easterlings seem primed to facilitate (totally random dice rolls, btw).
As for flanking, I think it might be easiest to just include it under the Help action. The one doing the 'help' engages the foe drawing their attention, but can't really attack themselves.
Yeah, after Éothain made his action this round I saw how that makes the most sense. I was getting hung up on Haleth also attacking while Thorgrim was gaining advantage. This way solves all the problems I had wrapping my head around it.
I'm not toally sold on Archers gaining advantage from a melee help action. Attacking from range is its own benefit, while the characters in melee take on all the risk. In the current scenario, Cereidh just needs to train her bow on whomever Haleth or Folc is "distracting" and she would also gain advantage. Then it becomes a 2 for 1 again. Knowing how Thorgrim's brain works, you will be abusing this rule left and right, sending squire NPCs to their doom one after another.
Let's make help/advantage a melee-only benefit for now.
My rolls are being grim!
I'm fine with the help action as is in the 5e book. Two characters cooperating to land a hit.
Cereidh, I need to know more about your character. I see "younger cousin of Legolas" and "emissary of Thranduil's court." In what Age was she born, who are her parents, exactly (if practical), and do you want to make a case for having known Rodwen, as the adventure has already established that Rodwen was also an emissary of Thranduil 500 years ago.
More critically, what was Cereidh's level of awareness of the Necromancer's occupations of Dol Guldur and did she ever visit that place prior, during, or after the occupation?
Thorgrim, how did you acquire Nostiscide?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
After seeing just 17 winters, Thorgrim was already a head taller than most, and was granted a seat around the warriors' cookfires. His broad shoulders and patherine quickness with spear or blade granted him a respect by even the long-bearded elders.
He was taken on a hunting party by Gyrth the Ragged Voyager, and Leofwine Coldshard. The elk were about to move on with the coming of snows, and the three cock-sure warriors wanted one more carcass for the cookpots.
They were cleaning a good kill, a 3-year old buck with long horns, when the baying first told them that the scent of blood on the wind brought hunters other than their own.
Unwilling to leave the kill, Thorgrim hefted the corpse whole upon his shoulders, and began a loping, efficient pace back, the other two keeping up with long strides.
Alas, the pack was large, larger than most, and cunning, for they saw bright eyes and dark fur to their front and rear. Thorgrim dropped the kill, hoping it would appease the wolves, and the three doubled their speed to the East.
Much of the pack fell upon the meat, but many flew after the three. Urging the pair onward, Gyrth turned and drew his heavy axe, determined to sell his life for that of the others. Thorgrim slowed to join him, but Leofwine chided him to not mock his death by wasting that which was bought by it.
The two sprinted on, chests heaving like bellows to keep up the pace, but the wolves, un-sated by one meal, soon were again at their heels.
Leofwine took his turn to stop, biding Thorgrim go on. Though the youth again slowed to make a stand shoulder-to-shoulder, he was again chided. Leofwine said he had had a good life, and would die with honor knowing his last stand purchased so much good youth.
Obeying his elder, Thorgrim ran on, but he had little hope his mile-eating run would be uninterrupted.
He was right.
One hand worth of wolves had been denied prior meat, so they thirsted after him.
Knowing even his quick strides could not long hold the pack at bay, Thorgrim looked about him for a good place to make a stand, perhaps some high ground, or a thick copse of trees.
Spying an ancient pile of crumbling ruins, he sprinted up a side, taking the weathered steps three at a time. When he got to the top, instead of anchoring his feet on firm purchase, the ground gave way, and he was surrounded by a darkened sepulcher.
Rising, with bruised legs and chest but with nothing broken, he made a circle of the place, looking for some way out, for he would much rather die fighting than trapped without food or water.
In time his eyes adjusted to the faint rays of light that stole through the hole his fall had made, and he eyed a grand sarcophagus. The top had long caved in, but the noble figure held therein, though skeletal, still held a wisp of his long-dead nobility. His armor, though rusted, spoke of a powerful northman, broad of chest and high of stature. His dour pate still bore an iron circle with a kind of grim brooding, as if, even in death, the struggles of the living weighed upon him, and we wished to ease suffering in however small way he could.
In his thin and gnarled fingers he clutched a massive blade. Six-feet long, and entirely untouched by the passing eons. To this Thorgrim's questing grip was drawn, and, seeing its former owner had no need of it, he took up the blade, bathed in its almost sentient radiance.
Feeling strength flow through him like a volcano of power, he clawed his way back up into the light.
The wolves were there, still growling, hungry and expectant.
He fell upon them as a whirling messenger of death, the sword cleaving their shadow-touched lives with hatred of all evil things.
As the village mourned the loss of two brave hunters with cookpots brimming with wolf-meat, the firelight glinted upon the edge of the keen blade, and Thorgrim read its name....
I'll devote more time to fleshing out Cereidh's backstory, but I may have to drag my feet on that for a couple more weeks - I'm still gearing up for finals for a couple of college classes.
I'm not as familiar with LotR as I used to be, and so while I think of Cereidh as a fairly young elf, I'm not sure what that would scale to in this setting. I would be interested in Cereidh having met Rodwen, and perhaps seeing her as a mentor-figure, and having visited Dol Guldur after the occupation in her solitary travels, driven by curiosity.
I can work with that. Cereidh is important to the immediate plotting, but we can develop her backstory together in Gameplay as we go.
I plan to move the party south in an update tonight. There's a lot of distance to cover between Haycombe and the Hill of Sorcery. The old source material I think does a bad job of it, confining players to the shackles and force marching for days and loading them up with exhaustion levels so the balance of the adventure is almost not fun by design. Working to correct that.
I am very interested to read Amalina's next post, as you are literally walking into the heart of the Shadow, if only in a dream.
The force marching sounds grim, cheers for working on that.
Looking forward to seeing how this plays out.
Sorry all, been busy with work and family stuff. Will post tomorrow morning.
All, it should go without saying, but please resist the temptation to read another player's spoilers. This time, at least.
We will resolve actions once all players have made their respective choices.
Findegil - gonna ignore what you just saw?
Edit: There was a second part to my post which I did not get a chance to add in, and forgot that I hadn't. Hence the confusion.
Ok, I thought you might have just missed what I wrote. Lots going on here.
That is a rough Wisdom save, the DCs are harder to hit in 5E. But it's not inappropriate, given it's The One Ring.
Did we heal and long rest before this encounter?
Yes, everyone is at full hit points.
My posting may be patchy this weekend. I doubt I'll get to post tomorrow.