I'm game for whichever, I suppose. It does seem that heavy dungeon crawling is not PBP-conducive. Would it make any difference if we skipped ahead to Book 2?
I don't know, Kas, it seems that big dungeons abound in Shattered Star? The other game I'm in we just finished in the Crow (I came in just before everyone hit level 5, so I'm guessing that's the end of Book 1 if it's at all similar to other APs?) but I had NO IDEA how it connected to where we've been so far in this game. They were referencing NPCs and areas and entrances that I had absolutely no context for. If they hadn't mentioned after I'd joined that we were in the Crow I would've thought it was a totally different dungeon.
After clearing the Crow, there was a brief chat with Lady Heidmarch, then a short boat ride followed by some chatter with a whacko witch lady, and now we're back inside another sprawling dungeon.
I get the impression from Dareon that this seems to be par for the course for the whole of the AP. Is that a fair read of things, Dareon? Aard, what are your impressions?
Shattered Star is a super-dungeon AP. It was supposed to give that "old-school delve" feel, while finding some way to break up the monotony. It did this by breaking what might have been one mega dungeon into 6 or 7 super dungeons, linked by story. The first levels are in the Crow.
So, if we stay with it, it's dungeon-crawling from here on out.
Pinch of salt: I own all the APs, and skimmed summary info when they were published, but I've only really read the AP's I've run as DM: Shackled City (ran twice), Rise of the Runelords (in final chapter with an online group). All I really know about the others is the "feel" and "gist".
My guess is that RP will be most important when the location is somewhat static:
CotCT (mostly in Korvosa)
Council of Thieves (mostly in Westcrown)
Jade Regent (mostly in a caravan that moves with the PCs)
RotRL (a lot in Sandpoint, but not really)
Council of Thieves strikes me as a heavy-roleplaying game, since you're locked into a certain location. CoCT is, of a sort, but once it takes the PCs out of Korvosa, it flits into quest/dungeon territory a lot.
I'm of the belief that the play in Council of Thieves could be quite a hoot with this group in particular.
Council of Thieves is an adventure that I'm familiar with and like a lot, though I've tried (and failed) to run it.
As for Shattered Star, your impressions about it are completely right. Every chapter save for the last is pretty much a huge dungeon. Chapter 3 is in Kaer Maga, delving into puzzle-y room after puzzle-y room. Chapter 4 is in a chapel, and is much more dynamic and interesting but is still pretty much endless combat.
Chapter 2 is the best dungeon, but it's still a dungeon.
Oh, and the new AP "Hell's Rebels" comes out this month. Another set in Cheliax. We could hustle on through the Crow, and give Aard a chance to scope out either CoT or Hell's Rebels.
Hell's Rebels is significantly more interesting to me than Council of Thieves, honestly.
I'm traveling a bunch over the next couple of weeks, but I should have computer access for most of it. But if I'm delayed for a day or so, that's why.
I don't really know anything about the next AP until I get my book.
I'm willing to run whatever you as a group decide upon, but let me say, I'm glad at least one of you said you didn't want Iron Gods (really not a fan of the inclusion of Sci-fi in my fantasy).
Just be wary, I only own the Core four Paizo books, and almost all the AP's. I'm not a big follower of Golarion. So I don't include stuff that is more from lore than the AP's.
So, is this where we stand? APs in preference order:
1. Hell's Rebels (assuming it is RP-heavy and pending final approval by Aard)
2. Council of Thieves
I'm ok with that.
That sounds like a decent plan to me!
Okay, was looking to see when I'll have it, and the PDF doesn't come available to me until Sep 2. So, I may get my hard-copy first, but that looks like it may be when we can start planning in more detail.
I got my first book of Hell's Rebels yesterday.
Is everyone still present?
Is the Player's Guide available for you guys yet. It's been dead silent in here, so I would like some confirmations.
The player's guide is available, yes! It was already available when (or at least shortly after) we settled on HR as our next stab at things. I'm still mulling over ideas as far as what kind of character to focus on, but I'm totally on board with you guys if we're wanting to move forward with it. Once enough interest is confirmed, are you intending to create a new campaign thread, Aard?
Yes, I will create new threads once we get rolling. I would rather we keep using this one for things like the Char-gen and discussion until we are ready to begin, so that the very first post in either thread (gameplay/discussion) can be related to the actual game itself.
I am also prepared to play in another game with you, though we might want to pick up a person or two.
I think I know what kind of character I want to play.
I'm happy to keep playing! I'll look up the guide this weekend. (And, as always, I'd like to have a max of 5 PCs, in case we're taking votes.)
I'd love to keep playing if you'll have me! I definitely need to think about what sort of character I'd like to play.
Rules question: would you allow one of the new Occult Adventures classes, specifically the Occultist?
I haven't even glanced at the new Occult stuff. I know I still won't allow the ACG though. But I will look it over and see what I think.
I was glancing over the AP. The story is pretty city sandbox-ish. Not quite as bad as Kingmaker, but there will need to be a lot of party discussion on plans and such.
Also, my core houserules will remain as they are. Just one exception. I want to try leveling you guys off of experience. That means there will need to be tracking of said XP.
Okay, what's everyone's opinions on number of players. I would to add them before we get heavy into the other aspects of Char-gen.
Also, as for adding any, I will select from others I have played with (first to mind are Brennan and Gabriel from my Mummy's Mask that Fade would recognize), unless there are other suggestions. I'm reluctant to add someone I haven't played with before, but I will if they are good enough from what I can read from their gameplay somewhere else.
EDIT: Okay, occult adventures isn't on the PRD. That right there gives me pause, but I'm sure I can find it on the SRD, maybe.
They are on the SRD.
And as always, if you're not comfortable with the classes, I can find something else to play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think an active group of four is pretty ideal, just in terms of pacing alone. And I think we have that now. That being said, it won't bother me if we pull in an additional player, so long as we don't spent week after week twiddling our thumbs waiting for him or her to contribute to the gameplay thread.
I've been kicking ideas around in my head and I've read through the fluffier portions of the player's guide a few times now to get a feel for Kintargo and some of the AP's prominent themes.
At this point, I'm strongly considering two very different ideas: an Order of the Tome Cavalier OR a fire-focused gnome Sorcerer. I like the cavalier more at the moment, but as always, time and whim might sway me otherwise.
The AP also sounds perfect for the Swashbuckler class from the ACG, [EDIT] and just realized Aard's already ruled it out. Shucks!
My initial thought is an infiltrator inquisitor of Iomedae.
Yeah, the swashbuckler looked perfect for this... then I remembered the ACG ban.
I keep waffling between an Occultist noble who can feel the powers of ancient objects, an oracle of the dark tapestry who has seen far too much and a monk archivist who secretly works for the Irori group.
Dude. That monk and the cavalier I have in mind would get along great as far as their goals would be concerned. Presuming as an archivist he or she'd be focused on the proper recording of history and events and such.
That would be the goal!
Aard, are you wanting us to avoid everything in the ACG or are archetypes ok in this case? Specifically, I was thinking of this cavalier archetype which sounds awfully thematic and appropriate for the AP.
I'm okay with ACG materials, just not ACG classes. Though looking at the Archetype, it uses a swashbuckler specific ability. I'm not a big fan of that.
I was looking at them, and I do not think I'm ready yet to include the Occult books. Don't get me wrong, I've enjoyed the inclusion of Psionics since the first time I found them in the back of the 1st Ed PHB. I just don't think the AP is written with them in mind (if they aren't on the PRD yet or if they might not even make it there), and I would rather not have to adjust stuff to make them do so.
Normally, I exclude the option of the asian-themed classes, but if it goes well with Fade's concept I'm okay with a monk. I only ask that it not be asian-influenced in its build.
Is a monk asian-themed?
Also, how you do feel about Dreamscarred Press' psionics?
As I understand them, they are pretty much almost a rehash of the 3.5 Psionics. Though I am much more familiar with them, I'd rather avoid them since I don't know how much they could off-balance a political uprising/intrigue style game that wasn't written with Psionics in mind.
Yes, the core monk is VERY much asian-themed. Slow fall, extra movement speed, Ki as a power source. These are not terms associated with boxers or wrestlers.
DM, I'm a little confused. Is it the class feature names that bother you or is the class itself? I have no problem rebranding class features, but if you dislike the class so much that you won't allow any portion of it then would you allow the Brawler class from ACG as an alternative?
Besides, what if we made a character from Tian-Xia? Or that happens to have studied in an Iroran monastery? Those definitely exist in the Inner Sea region.
Either way, with no ACG and no psionics I definitely want to play an Iomedaen divine caster.
I want to play some version of a scouty guy. I feel like being up front for a change, if that's ok with everyone. I promise to have an excellent posting rate.
'Nay' on guns as well, correct? Presuming so, and with the kibosh on the daring champion archetype, I think I'll avoid cavalier. The class just seems too... well, 'bleh' for what I'm hoping for.
And in lieu of that, I think I might try a similar approach to what I'd intended with Fade: using the base chassis of a magus and perhaps sprinkling in some rogue levels for some savvy with the social skills. Or the gnome sorcerer I'd mentioned before. I'll keep mulling things over.
I like your pick for Iomedae, Dareon. Seems a bold choice for the AP from what I've read and could be fertile ground for some neat interactions with NPCs as the Glorious Reclamation escalates in the narrative background. =)
After thinking about it, I'm going with an Unchained Rogue for my first level for my Irorian archivist/spy historian. Human, because, well, reasons...
I think I've hammered down the concept and stats. Now I just need to come up with a good name.
Okay, I'm taking next week off of work. Not traveling or anything, but since my comp recently crapped out, my posting may be slower and sporadic until I get it fixed (hopefully shortly), while I'm away from my work computers.
My dislike of monk is based entirely off a whole big diatribe that I don't want to get into. Regardless, the flavor and the powers go hand in hand. They were given those names, because they were created with abilities based off that flavor. The two are one and the same. However, I do understand, that out of core, the best way to make an unarmed combatant is through monk (takes way too much other combinations to build from any other class).
As far as a character from Tian-Xia, that is purely flavor. I don't agree that a different culture should have a whole set of classes (mechanics) that belong to them when all it needs is a flavor difference. Your a viking warrior, well take Barbarian, Ranger, or Fighter and flavor them appropriately. Your a Native American warrior, well take Barbarian, Ranger, or Fighter and flavor them appropriately. Oh, your a Samurai, hold on, lets create new class mechanics for that. Oh, you're a ninja, No, don't reflavor rogue, we'll create new class mechanics for that. I think Monk, Samurai, Ninja need anything more than Archetypes as best. Do we have a whole classes devoted specifically to Scandinavian, or Spanish, or Native American, or African culture? Then why do we need them for East Asia? Sorry. Just a pet peeve.
Correct, Fade, no guns either.
Are we decided to keep it at 4 players? That's what I was getting from the majority.
I played a "monk" once that used the game mechanics, but renamed all of them. He was basically re-skinned as a street tough with some British flavor. Wisdom represented intense street smarts, rather than spiritual connection.
Ki became "Piss and Vinegar", still mind was "small mind", slow fall was an unwillingness to f#$king die already, same with purity of body (which was developed through a lifetime of fast living).
I didn't rename them on the character sheet, I just called them different things while we were playing.
"Me dad and me dad's dad were bouncers too, ya little tosser!"
Sort of like Jason Stratham without the nice clothes. Core rules, no Asian flavor.
I'm fine with having four players. And I think I've decided on a Chivalry Inquisition inquisitor... though I still need to read the players' guide.
I think this group of 4 should do well, Aard. If we find ourselves really stymied after things kick off maybe we could revisit the idea of recruiting a 5th, but I'm not expecting we'll feel like we need to do so.
I did some perusing of d20pfsrd.com (I typically just work off of the prd hosted on paizo's site) since I keep coming back to the character I had in mind for my cavalier idea but couldn't find an engaging way of actually making a cavalier that I liked. I came across an archetype from the Animal Archive, the huntmaster, which I dig. Would that meet your approval for play, Aard?
And on a somewhat related and yet also unrelated note, I hope your computer repairs go well, dude!
What about the cavalier is dis-satisfying to you? What about the cavalier do you want? Maybe I can help.
Part of the dissatisfaction lies in the fact I already have a cavalier in a different game and I want this one to be very different from that one. And with the other one, the Tactician and Banner abilities are both really boring, so I'd been looking for an archetype that would let me ditch them.
So, that really just leaves the Order and the Mount as the main draws for the class. I love the Order I'd already settled on, but for being such an urban campaign I'm expecting the mount to underperform as a class feature. And as a medium character, that really hinders where that ho-hum horse can go.
So, with all that in mind, I was really hoping for something that would let me keep the cavalier order, but blunt the focus on a mount and outright drop tactician and banner.
I was also hoping for a more Errol Flynn kind of feel behind the mechanics, daring cavalier hit all those notes, which made it really attractive. Conversely, none of the archetypes that appear in the PRD had anything that made me sit up and say, "Hey, that's an interesting idea! Maybe I could..."
The Emissary archetype gives abilities both in and out of the saddle (literally an ability called that) and if you want to blunt the mounted focus, just take abilities that are not mounted. The emissary archetype also drops Tactician.
The ghost rider archetype might also be what you're looking for - it drops tactician and some of the mounted class features for other, really cool stuff.
You can also take another class, like the rogue, and use Variant Multiclassing and Animal Ally to grab cavalier abilities and a mount.
Speaking of, GM, how do you feel about Unchained? Variant Multiclassing? Background Skills? The Unchained classes?
No, it was only my laptop's motherboard, nothing too bad [/sarcasm]
Yeah, my comp is screwed, so it's either go buy a new one, or pay almost new one prices to replace/fix the motherboard... yay!
That said, in a fit of "why the hell not", I'm going to lift almost all of my restrictions. Any Paizo class or race (still no 3P), just remember with race, it is a city-based campaign and citizens will react accordingly to the very unusual (probably almost as bad or worse than they treat tieflings)
I know nothing of Unchained, and am not looking to add/change rules other than those directly attached to a specific class.
Variant Multiclassing allows you to exchange half of your feats for a secondary class, which gives you some class features.
For example, the variant multiclass for paladin.
It gives you detect evil at 3rd, lay on hands at 7th, smite evil at 11th and I don't remember the 15th and 19th abilities. But you lose those feats.
Background skills gives 2 extra skill ranks that one can use for only specific skills. Like Craft!
Also, as for restrictions, I might be going for a divine commander warpriest instead. Or a regular warpriest and multiclassing somehow to get a mount.
I'm going for the Unchained Rogue, to begin with. I am wedded to the idea of playing a young man who is secretly a devotee of Irori, who is committed to recording the accurate history of Cheliax, despite the official line. He's not much for combat, but he is full of skills and hope and most likely, doomed to die young.
Another thing about Unchained that I love is Automatic Bonus Progression - it removes amulets of nat armor, rings of protection, belts/headbands of +stat, enhancement bonuses on weapons and cloaks of protection and replaces them with by-level gain.
Saves slots for better s!%*.