1 - Mummy's Mask
2 - Carrion Crown
3 - Council of Thieves
4 - Reign of Winter
5 - Legacy of Fire
What Brennan said
1. Reign of Winter
2. Council of Thieves
3. Mummy's Mask
4. Jade Regent
5. Serpent's Skull
I'm for Council of Thieves for reasons stated before. Next would be Jade Regent just for a change of flavor. After that I don't have a preference.
so...
1. Council of Thieves
2. Jade Regent
3...
4...
5...
If at all possible I would prefer any kind of preference, as I will be computing the results based on the total number, and a blank no preference will skew it too much.
Just find which ones sound like they would be the most entertaining to experience.
If at all possible I would prefer any kind of preference, as I will be computing the results based on the total number, and a blank no preference will skew it too much.
Just find which ones sound like they would be the most entertaining to experience.
Really?
1. Council of Thieves
2. Jade Regent
3. Mummy's Mask
4. Reign of Winter
5. Legacy of Fire
Okay, it's been quiet for a while. I will say that it looks like it's going to be Mummy's Mask.
Please read and familiarize yourselves with the Player's Guide. So far the starting premise seems a little different.
I will begin a discussion at one point, as I have some House rules that Frytz and Nico are already familiar with from another game. Don't commit to a character concept just yet, the house rules may modify them.
Also, I wanted to ask, what's everyone's opinion on number of players? I know the AP's are written for 4, but I personally like 6.
Also, almost forgot, the key to getting this thing going is the pace of posting.
Now, I personally hate to put a 1/day requirement onto it, because I don't always have time or the ability to do that and can't ask others to do what I myself am unable to commit to doing. I would like to put it at a minimum of 1/two days, with a 1/weekend or even no weekend post (Fri afternoon - Sun night) request, since I know my weekends tend to get real busy. With a no weekend post, though, a Monday post would be expected.
If you cannot post, at that pace for any reason, at least post a heads-up "real busy, can't post for few days" would suffice in most instances.
I know I'm a REAL lenient GM on PbP pacing, but I think that's what causes my games to languish at times. I'm going to try and be a little more regulatory, and would like to discuss what would be good hard caps on posting, and how long is too long.
It may take me a few days before I have a day to dedicate to catching up on the boards, but I need to do this and will make sure to familiarize myself with the correct players' guide in time.
As for party size, I'm a fan of five but think that six or more should be recruited, assuming that we'll lose a few as time goes by.
As to posting rate, I think that one post every three days, but no more often than you post, should be expected. Three times the expected frequency in terms of time should be the "check-in" time, although one players' absence from a game shouldn't hamper it overmuch. There was one player gone from a game for nearly three weeks before I noticed and shot him a message.
I am going on travel today until Thursday. I should have time to read and catch up on the AP player's guide.
Here's my take on the number of players question.
It depends... Like that answer?
On one hand, it is my belief that having more players will generally help to maintain game-play inertia. On the other hand, it could dramatically slow things up.
Aard, IF you as the DM, are willing to rule that while in combat, players who do not respond within 24 hrs (or whatever time period you feel acceptable) of the start of their turn, default to having their characters delay/pass/dither, then having more players will only help advance the story. You have already done this a number of times, so I don't think this will be an issue.
If you are opposed to that, then I can see a single combat taking a month or more to resolve, and would prefer to have a smaller group. IMHO, slow progress isn't always better than no progress.
As for the expectation to post. There is a balance to be had, though I'm not sure what that is.
I see two separate expectations wrt posting. 1. Checking Posts, 2. Posting.
Your expectation for 1 can't exceed (time-wise) your expectation 2.
e.g. check every 48 hrs but post within 24 hrs of the start of your turn.
I think a reasonable rate would be checking once/48hrs and posting within 12hrs of the start of your turn. Noting that your character will delay/dither/pass on their turn if you bust the timeline.
I also think that expectations are just that. They are not hard and fast and should always give way to common sense and pre coordinated extenuating circumstances.
So I have been and am currently giving a large amount of thought to my continuance into this new campaign. On one hand I find myself eager and full of anticipation of the start of a new campaign. On the other I know the initial thrust of a new campaign will waiver and at that point need to ask myself if I have the time, resources, and determination to spend to make it fair to other for me to continue participating. Currently rational me says to just bow out, but gamer me wants to play. So pending some additional input from the floor and some additional conversation with Aardvark I would like to continue following the development and inception of the new campaign without officially bowing out, but I currently want everyone to continue development without me for the time being.
I may gauge my current desire and wherewithal to commit based on how closely I follow the development and flow during campaign inception.
Input from anyone?
Were I unsure if I had the time or desire to participate, at this point in time, I would bow out now.
I'm NOT saying you should bow out.
Based on side conversations we have had, I think Aard wishes to recruit players who want to progress through an AP, at a reasonably consistent pace. Each of us have demands placed on our time that will inevitably result in our absence. In an ideal situation, that would never happen, but reality has a way of rearing its ugly head. I don't think anyone I have gamed with to date, would be seriously put out by another player's absence, provided prior notice was given and the absentee player did not make a habit out of it.
If you feel you are incapable of managing your enthusiasm for the campaign as time goes on, then I would rather you didn't play. Having a player the group grows to rely on early in the campaign, due to heightened levels of participation, drop down to sporadic bare minimum posting levels, is in some ways worse than having a bare-minimum player from the get go.
Ultimately, I would prefer that you decide to commit to the game, because I think you provide insightful rp when you do post. I completely understand if your real-life demands are such that you cannot commit. I'm not sure I could were I in your shoes.
Actually, I've been thinking a lot about that. As much as I love playing on paizo, I've been looking to downsize. That means I'll have to bow out from this game in the works.
Well, I hate to see anyone go, but I fully understand other things causing the ability to either play or post to wane. As it was when I first began I had to resign two games I was running because I knew I wasn't going to be able to keep up.
I know Belor is out for certain, although he hasn't said as much. Now Lein is also out. Currently, I still have Frytz, Kelly, Brennan, and Eldarel.
I decided I will be looking to have 6 players, so I can either recruit openly for a few spots, or ask from fellow players from other games.
How would you all like to do it? An open recruitment (for 2-3 slots depending), which could open up for new blood and allow time for any others to decide? Or ask amongst my other games from the players I know I am comfortable with their playstyle and posting pace?
You know what, I think I would like to do an invite-only recruitment. Basically, I will open a recruitment and direct everyone from the games I'm in towardds it. All the same, each of you will be allowed to invite whoever you want to it, that you may know as a good player. As long as you let me know who you invited so I don't think they just wandered in off the recruitment page.
I will post my houserules in the thread. Once I have put the thread together I will link it here so you guys know where to find it and direct others to it.
HERE is the link to the invite only recruitment.
I would like to use this thread to discuss the applicants. That way it is out of sight, and I don't have to worry about upsetting anyone.
So far, does anyone have any preferences or negatives about any particular applicant?
I think they all look pretty good - the only thing I'm thinking of is more of a metagaming point about party balance: both a full-on divine support and a rogue would complement the existing group nicely; from what I can tell, Za'el is arcane support, Gus is tank/striker, and Morena is arcane/melee - they should work well together regardless of who is picked.
Looking forward to this; I like the idea that we have to create some sort of back-story and be a pre-existing group - I might recycle that in future...
[EDIT] - just to confirm I would have no problem with 2 paladins; I think they're different enough in style that it won't be noticed.
Aardvark DM - I know I have been incommunicado as I was traveling (posting from a phone isn't much fun). If you don't have room for me I completely understand.
Well, we seem to be caster heavy, so some tanking is definitely in order. My first inclination is to pick players based on their ability to follow your initial character restrictions, as this is demonstrative of their ability to read/comprehend and follow directions.
*Hastily checks to make sure he complied with those restrictions*
I agree with Fritz...
So, from the selections thus far, I am leaning heavily towards Sturm (the dwarven Pharasmin). For the second slot, I am liking Raymond Moreau (the Lore Warden), but there are still a few characters and backstories yet to be finished. I may be interested in what Odea has cooked up with the Desert Ghost ranger.
The recruitment thread also allows me to see just how frequent some posters may be. Some have only rolled stats, others have made suggested builds, and about half actually have profile/full stats and story.
My general thoughts are to not tell people when they've made their character wrong, and if they have, they to just not consider them. For example, the sylph bard doesn't really have a backstory, nor does she have a feat that isn't Weapon Finesse.
I think that Asta Bridgette is too...baldly mechanical.
If Kennar's backstory were written more coherently and clearly, I'd like it a lot.
Gordon's implies a lot of past experience, and I don't like 1st-level characters that imply a lot of work done in the past.
Donavaan Taar doesn't really have any story yet.
I'm leaning towards the cleric too, I suppose, is what I want to say. If the Sylph Bard wants to add more in, I'd like to have a character like that around. We could use something...martial, although Morana'll be going in that direction, quite a bit.
From a purely mechanical standpoint, if you accept Sturm then (between him, Morana and Z'ael) we'd have magical support pretty much sewn up. Therefore, as the final slot I suggest we need either someone who can help us survive in that environment (ranger, or someone else with the survival skill); or a DPR type (any suitable class).
The only other consideration from my perspective is if someone has come up with a character concept that's so compelling we want to take them anyway.
My first pick is Sturm. For the final slot, I'm intrigued by the Ghost Ranger concept as well. The lore warden (Dex build, lightly armored) also looks promising but not likely to soak much more damage than the rest of us. Between a DEX based fighter and a Ranger, I'd rather have the ranger for his likely ability to help the rest of the party survive the hostile climate/environment.
I tend to agree - but (in the absence of a wizard) we are short of a pure knowledge type to identify monsters and so forth - a Lore Warden might help remedy this. Just a thought.
Ultimately, I think nearly all of the completed characters look good from a RP perspective; I think almost any 2 from Raymond, Sturm, Kennar, Andrei, Asta or Surubi would work. Obviously a cleric (especially a cleric of Pharasma) would be really helpful; but maybe it's more of a challenge without a priest...?
I mean, I can take Knowledge ranks. I've got them all as class skills, and I don't have a terrible INT stat.
Also, I tend to agree with the above. I think what we need the most is additional magical support and some DPR.
I think I'm leaning heavily towards Sturm and Surubi. I actually really enjoy the whole idea of her fawning over Gus, to the point she bought a sword just to be like him, even though she's a heavy Dex-based archery type. I think there's a lot of good potential RP there. I also like that Sturm's connection to Gus and Z'ael seems reasonable and meshes well. Some of the others feel too much like just an add-on.
Now, I just need to wait until Wed when recruitment closes for someone to wow me away from those two.
Works for me.
Oh, Frytz, your backstory said your sorcerer was trained by another earth sorcerer mentor. You know, sorcery isn't normally a trained ability, as much as inherent from having something earth elemental (or Shaitan-genie)in your bloodline?
So he was more of a mentor. I'll update it to indicate a stonemason apprenticeship.
I think I'm leaning heavily towards Sturm and Surubi. I actually really enjoy the whole idea of her fawning over Gus, to the point she bought a sword just to be like him, even though she's a heavy Dex-based archery type. I think there's a lot of good potential RP there. I also like that Sturm's connection to Gus and Z'ael seems reasonable and meshes well. Some of the others feel too much like just an add-on.
Now, I just need to wait until Wed when recruitment closes for someone to wow me away from those two.
I just took a longer look at Sturm than I had previously, and I really like the character. I recommend that we take him.
I'd like that someone had a connection to Morana, however, even if it's one of the other guaranteed-spot-characters.
It could still happen with Surubi, Gus, Z'ael, or Brennan. Sturm is the only one with both connections tasked. Surubi has it with only Gus. The connections need not be both directions. Like Surubi is attached to Gus, but he doesn't have the same attachment to her. Sturm has an attachment to Gus and Z'ael, but neither have returned that attachment as well (granted that could just be because there isn't a definite recruit yet).
Yeah, I didn't want to include a player in my backstory that didn't have a reserved spot on the team. for fear of giving someone false hope, or overstepping my role as a player vice GM.
Once players are confirmed I'll think more about connections - for the moment I've just been trying out RP responses to get the character established in my own mind.
Look forward to seeing who you pick! Has Brennan definitely confirmed he wants in, by the way? He hasn't posted much.
Finally back! I'm in town, I have internet, and I am no longer running a 104 fever! Huzzah!
My vote for group name is Adventurer's Inc.
I'm in, will be running Brennan, with appropriate mods.
Rolls (copied from recruitment thread)
4d6 ⇒ (6, 6, 3, 6) = 21 - 18 (DEX)
4d6 ⇒ (1, 4, 1, 5) = 11 - 10 (INT)
4d6 ⇒ (6, 4, 6, 1) = 17 - 16 +2 = 18 (STR)
4d6 ⇒ (5, 5, 3, 5) = 18 - 15 (CON)
4d6 ⇒ (5, 1, 3, 1) = 10 - 9 (CHA)
4d6 ⇒ (4, 5, 5, 4) = 18 - 14 (WIS)
Going with Foreign Opportunist for the campaign trait.
I'd happily take up with Morana for a connection. Changing Brennan's core personality a bit to reflect a slightly darker character.
Lolwhut - darker than your previous split-personality character...?!
*backs away slowly* ;)
The split personality thing wasn't working out the way I'd hoped. It was too hard to maintain consistency in a slow-post game.
The new Brennan will be closer to an all-around no-*&^%-taking, *&^% mouth talking, do it because it has to be done but don't give me any of that forthegreatergood *&^%, and what do I get out of it?
So you're planning to be the group's (im)moral compass? :)
That was how I was planning to play Eldarel: basically lazy and selfish and only out for what he could get - or charm others into getting for him.
More like brutish and straightforward and why take the time to charm someone when you can cut their thumbs off?
More like brutish and straightforward and why take the time to charm someone when you can cut their thumbs off?
"I like this man - he talks my sort of language... "
11 +0
13 +1
10 +0
14 +2
14 +2
9 -1
+4 Not valid
15 +2
14 +2
15 +2
12 +1
12 +1
15 +2
+10 Valid set
Please double check my math.