At least one non-elf should have (low) Elven, I think it would be convenient.
Would you guys mind running a couple of combats here, for me to calibrate the level of challenge, please? I am not experienced with this CR-tuning. It would purely mechanical, though, the point is to be quick, and maybe to figure out our posting style so that combat can be handled effectively here in PbP.
Not to mention, can you imagine what a tutor of Aklo would be like?*waves happily while jumping up and down*
Are you going to say "Like this guy"?
Next thing you know there will be some character picking the "Teacher's Pet" campaign trait and saying Prof. Lorrimor was his/her Aklo tutor...
Lol maayyybbbeee, but I actually meant Naught could teach them.
Would you guys mind running a couple of combats here, for me to calibrate the level of challenge, please? I am not experienced with this CR-tuning. It would purely mechanical, though, the point is to be quick, and maybe to figure out our posting style so that combat can be handled effectively here in PbP.
No problem.
With a party of seven, in general I would add +1 to the CR of most encounters. For instance, if the AP calls for two CR 1/2 creatures (a CR 1 encounter in total) to face the party in combat, I'd make it a CR 2 encounter, such as by either:
a) adding one or two more of the same CR 1/2 creature to the encounter, or
b) using two of a stronger CR 1 variant of the same or similar creature.
EDIT: Or... c) using one CR 1 variant and one or two CR 1/2 creatures together.
At least one non-elf should have (low) Elven, I think it would be convenient.
Would you guys mind running a couple of combats here, for me to calibrate the level of challenge, please? I am not experienced with this CR-tuning. It would purely mechanical, though, the point is to be quick, and maybe to figure out our posting style so that combat can be handled effectively here in PbP.
For DM relavent stats like AC I've got them for Naught above her avatar in the spoilers "Normal" and "Raging".
For attacks I would roll both the attack and damage even If I don't know it hit to save time so itd look like:
Good point about languages, Ulrik. I think a good scholarly type (e.g. a wizard, like Gandalf knowing the Vile Tongue) might learn darker languages for purely scholarly reasons, while a paladin or good cleric might be inclined to learn what the dark utterings of their enemies mean... but otoh, it is very compelling to think of those languages as having an energy of their own when spoken, read, or written.
You could also go here to check out a fight in the RoW pbp I'm playing in, I think the DM does a good job at handling the combat.
Would you guys mind running a couple of combats here, for me to calibrate the level of challenge, please? I am not experienced with this CR-tuning. It would purely mechanical, though, the point is to be quick, and maybe to figure out our posting style so that combat can be handled effectively here in PbP.No problem.
With a party of seven, in general I would add +1 to the CR of most encounters. For instance, if the AP calls for two CR 1/2 creatures (a CR 1 encounter in total) to face the party in combat, I'd make it a CR 2 encounter, such as by either:
a) adding one or two more of the same CR 1/2 creature to the encounter, or
b) using two of a stronger CR 1 variant of the same or similar creature.EDIT: Or... c) using one CR 1 variant and one or two CR 1/2 creatures together.
Also the Advanced template would work.
* Aliseya frowns and wags her index finger at Ulrik, implicating shame on him *
Uh uh uh, Ulrik. No fair, using Naught's fantasy man against her. ;)
Also the Advanced template would work.
Yep, that too.
* Aliseya frowns and wags her index finger at Ulrik, implicating shame on him *
Uh uh uh, Ulrik. No fair, using Naught's fantasy man against her. ;)
The other option would be saying that Naught already kinda looks like an Aboleth... (wait, what is Ulrik's charisma again?)
EDIT: Did I go too far?
The other option would be saying that Naught already kinda looks like an Aboleth... (wait, what is Ulrik's charisma again?)
EDIT: Did I go too far?
Aliseya's jaw drops wide open as she rapidly sucks in air. Exhaling slowly, she angrily shakes her head at Ulrik as she stands with arms akimbo. If looks could kill...
* Aliseya frowns and wags her index finger at Ulrik, implicating shame on him *
Uh uh uh, Ulrik. No fair, using Naught's fantasy man against her. ;)
The other option would be saying that Naught already kinda looks like an Aboleth... (wait, what is Ulrik's charisma again?)
EDIT: Did I go too far?
... Are you saying I'm fat?
... Are you saying I'm fat?
Oh damn, this just can NOT end well. Nice knowing you, Ulrik... * Aliseya ducks for cover *
... Are you saying I'm fat?
Urhgok akkhordek aztuz
*checks languages known... Damn*
I'm gonna take that to mean "Of course not you sexy witchspawn."
Actually, I have only seen slender female characters illustrated in Pathfinder content (but I haven't seen many books)...
Nice evasion, Ulrik. We almost needed another coffin... for you! ;)
As for non-slender women portrayed in Pathfinder, the fat lady literally does sing in Chapter 2 of the Council of Thieves AP.
There's also Mammy Graul from RotRL *twitch* *twitch* as well as the last Runelord of Envy, Belimarius.
I bet they are having trouble coming from Lepidstadt ;) I sent one to Andras a while ago, and I saw Briar respond here. I will send them a message.
I will move the game a little bit more tomorrow.
And Aliseya thought SHE was late. ;)
Looking forward to their arrival.
Glrgh, so busy with life. Unfortunately, it's not looking like it's going to let up any time soon, so I think I'm going to have to bow out, if only so that you can grab someone directly from the recruitment thread instead of doing a whole search. Best of luck with your campaigning, all!
:( That's too bad. Thanks Briar.
I'm thinking... if Andras shows, we should be fine with six players.
We should be fine even with five. I hope we hear from Andras.
Briar, thanks for the heads-up. Keep writing those great texts, and don't make yourself too busy!
Zelda, your Diplomacy bonus is +5, and Mirelinza, I think your Diplomacy bonus should be +6 (or +2, but not +4).
I saw that some other groups were using sanity rules, and I found a set of mental stability rules that is nice (the one in the d20srd is nice too).
I thought about these rules because I have played Call of Cthulhu once. I knew such rules existed, and I have been thinking about how to use them from the beginning. I don't want it to be one more "HP" that you have to manage and not-lose-otherwise-you-die, but I think it does help keep track of how affected your characters have been.
What do you guys think of using mental stability rules and keeping track of a stability score for the purpose of aiding roleplay? My proposal is to keep track of a number and list some of the effects when many points are lost at a time, and when one has points below a certain value, so that you guys can roleplay accordingly (e.g, a paranoid character, one that just snaps and runs away from a dungeon, etc).
(There are rules for recovering the points too, using divine magic like Lesser Restoration, so I don't think it will become a complete drag on the long run.)
I want it, however, to be more general than mental stability; it is like a zeal score, or resolve, or courage (maybe along the lines of the highest of INT, WIS, CHA?). Whatever it is that will keep your characters, as I said, going forward in the face of distress. I would even add that the score means your characters' capacity to keep it together in the face of great troubles, instead of just saying "It's not worth it, I give up!".
Opinions?
Five players is enough as well, agreed.
Mental stability rules... sounds intriguing. Would specific mental issues a) be imposed on characters (e.g. a random table, or GM decision), b) be determined by the player (e.g. while the numerical degree of instability is given, the player decides how it manifests), or c) somewhere in between (e.g. GM and player discuss and agree on a malady/maladies of the mind)?
I like (c), and there are some very thorough rules in a thread at the Carrion Crown AP messageboard. I will paste and adapt them. As I said, I do not want to enforce a particular mechanical effect -- ineptitude, WIS damage, death, but I will tell the player "Your character has reached a score of 8. At such a score, a character whose score measures mental stability would develop mild paranoia." Then you can roleplay a compatible effect in your character. Mirelinza would be a good example, because her crisis regards faith, not so much mental stability, so her zeal could waiver, if the player desired to interpret it that way.
Sounds good. :)
Any input from the others will be appreciated :)
I will have some initial trouble turning this into a horror campaign, but I will certainly try :)
Im fine with those rules :3
Speaking of rules, how are you running Initiative? Highest goes first like in an in-person game then just follow down?
Something another of my PbP GMs did was average the whole group so it boiled down to basically PCs or Enemies go then the other, saves a lot of time.
In this short combat initiative is somewhat important, so we will run it as normal. But I think I will adopt yours for future combats. I will certainly give it a try if all agree. Maybe not the average rolls, because it will tend to concentrate around 10.5, but one roll at the average bonus of the group...
I am still trying to think something that will be fair and efficient combat in PbP. For quickness, the best would be to let the characters act at will and somehow attack every now and then with the enemies, but that can mess up the combat if the more damage-oriented characters are allowed to attack. (Just imagine a party of 5 barbarians against anyone...)
k, Gotcha.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Zelda, your Diplomacy bonus is +5, and Mirelinza, I think your Diplomacy bonus should be +6 (or +2, but not +4).
I have +2 for my Persuasive Feat and +2 for my Ability Modifier. Have I missed something? I tend to rely on sCoreForge to get it right - but it never hurts to check.
What do you guys think of using mental stability rules and keeping track of a stability score for the purpose of aiding roleplay? My proposal is to keep track of a number and list some of the effects when many points are lost at a time, and when one has points below a certain value, so that you guys can roleplay accordingly (e.g, a paranoid character, one that just snaps and runs away from a dungeon, etc).
Opinions?
I like the idea - the devil is always in the detail. I can see it working for Mirelinza - as her character doubts her faith and even the death of the professor has rocked that aspect of her personality.
My only concern would be if it was entirely based upon the roll of a dice. I once lost a character because of two dice rolls (not mine) that meant she drowned. All those levels and time and investment gone in two posts. As you can tell, it still hurts (and it was over 12 months ago).
Speaking of rules, how are you running Initiative? Highest goes first like in an in-person game then just follow down?
Something another of my PbP GMs did was average the whole group so it boiled down to basically PCs or Enemies go then the other, saves a lot of time.
A variation to throw in the hat - that speeds up the games I GM is:
1. Roll initiatives as normal
2. All initiatives HIGHER OR EQUAL TO the bad guys go in pretty much any order (so you don't have to wait for the highest to go first)
3. The bad guys go
4. All lower than the bad guys go (again any order)
I also tend to put a 24-hour clock on combat, so if a player doesn't post, they are botted or do nothing. There is little more frustrating than a simply skirmish with a couple of goblins lasting a week.
Oh, and my players asked me to roll their initiatives for them. That way we don't have to wait two days to decide who goes when. A bit more work for the GM (but I save the text in a Word document and cut and paste it when combat starts).
I've gone on a bit now and will stop...#justmythoughtsandramblings
Personally, I am a fan of block initiative for PbP games, which is the method Mirelinza mentions exactly. I'm fine with taking an average if you prefer, though I think it has the potential to annoy those in the party who particularly rely on high initiative for their tactics (e.g. rogues).
So... looks like this game is going downhill fast! Lol.
Didn't mean to single you out, Zelda. I was just writing generally, and rogue happened to be the first example that came to mind.
Also, nice save, hope it works! Especially because you guys REALLY don't want to see Aliseya when she's... not calm. :o
I will wait for Cellawyn and Naught, then it's time for the mob to act.
Please bear in mind that Zelda's initial action was to lower the coffin and draw her weapons while threatening the people, to which Kendra and the apothecary-lady reacted bitterly. So her venerable Diplomacy roll will only "cut" in the second round, that is, after the mob acts (and if she is willing to keep it).
I am fine with her speaking the things in throughout the combat, though, so the issue at hand is just the mechanical impact of the check.
(Regarding combat, I think I will go with the block initiative as well.)
Ok, now that the coffin has been lowered, block initiative rules effective from now onwards :)
Zelda, if you would still like, I will have the combat go as though your previous post was the one for this round.
Coolio. I'll wait for the procession npcs before posting then.
For quick reference, I placed the current initiative order in my profile, under the Notes spoiler.
Thankies :3 Happy Easter to you too!
And to you!