I'm pretty much good with playing any adventure except Serpent's Skull. I'm currently running that campaign for others. I'm good with playing Pavo or making a new character. I'd rather keep Elric (player) than lose him.
Yep, ditto.
I'd like to keep the group as is. Feel the character bonding is going well.
Maybe we could be asked to go on a mission by the Braeton family to look into one of their interests. Could lead to travel anywhere.
Hostility quelled, carnival ends, Robella dealt with, Skulks on better terms.
Peace at home, we roam.
One's relationship with Braeton and other merchants can secure passage. We can travel with Carnival for a spell.
Good point on the Braetons. They could send us pretty far afield.
One thing they could do, is send us to track down a relative, and let them know what happened. Once that mission is done.... Blammo. AP.
I think you're the one who convinced us... That it was unfair and depressing. :)
This module definitely feels like a Pyrrhic victory, and I've heard that CotCT has the same feel. That's not the type of adventure I want to spend years playing. A few months, like this module, is enough for me! :)
He used the word Pyrrhic! Kudos! Let him pick, let him pick!
Right? That was always one of my favorites, too.
Orne will use this on the front door...
Door Sight (Su): You can lay your hand upon any surface and see what is on the other side, as if using clairvoyance. Using this power takes 1 minute, during which time you must be touching the surface you want to see through. You can keep looking for as long as 10 minutes with each use of this power, but must touch the surface and take no other action the entire time. The surface cannot be thicker than 6 inches plus 1 inch per cleric level you possess. You can use this power a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Wisdom modifier.
Crud, I had Filton in there the first time I typed that post out, but then the site went down as I posted and I forgot to include him the second time. :/
As a wise person once side "I got your back".
I'd probably go, in order, e, d, a, c, b. If we do end up on Rise of the Runelords, I promise I'll try my hardest not to spoil anything, but I am playing in it IRL right now. (I do think it would be a good fit for these characters, though, from my experience up to the end of book 1.)
I vote to play Giantslayer!
I also would prefer (beg for, especially since we're not min-maxing) higher Point-Buy!
Higher point buy? Come on, where's your sense of adventure? ;)
My thoughts on what to play are E=D, >> B >> C > A.
I'm ambivalent on the point buy, could easily make adjustments if needed.
If we end up in Rise, I will also try hard to squish my pre-knowledge. I think we're entering book 3ish.
I've heard Second Darkness is Good, but is better if the DM takes liberties to improve it.
But, but, but, there are giants... and you might slay them!
Tricky naming, that AP. You know the one in talking about.
As for my sense of adventure, that is directly, and my aversion to risk is indirectly, related to point-buy.
Mmhmm. 20 point buy, no score below ten.
What do DMs have against confident characters?
The paths are built around 15-point buy, so we should still be just fine.
Ok, I'm back. 10 hours in a car with two kids under 2. Makes a long drive even longer.
I'm up for Giant killer; I've been wanting to play that one.
Once we grapples as giant, there's no going back!
That seems physically unlikely. :P
Now I want to see a giant-grappling character. :)
So... Is everyone playing a dwarf in that campaign? Lol. I've actually read some GM's recommend limiting the number of dwarves, but I don't recall them giving any solid reason other that vague fears of OP. The game might also be a great opportunity to play a halfling fighter that's actually effective.
I'd be fine with using the same characters; I'm kind of attached to Aliana, haha. But if everyone wants to change characters, that's fine, too.
I was hoping so...
And since we're not giant optimized, 25 point-buy, pretty please.
For me it would probably add 1 to Wisdom, and maybe 2 to Charisma. Wouldn't think that tips any scale.
You can always beef up a giant and kill us.
So optimistic. ;) Yeah, I wouldn't mind the extra point or so of Dexterity, although I can live without it.
I'm not sold on playing a sorcerer who's focused on dealing non-lethal damage and capturing enemies in a campaign called Giant killer. Im actually not sure what I'd want to play for that campaign at all. I'd really need to think about it. I usually can't decide on a character until after I've read the players guide to the campaign. So maybe this one will work out - I don't know yet.
As I mentioned earlier, for this character, I'd be very happy with RofRL or Jade Regent. RotRL is off the table as a lot of others are already playing it. There was only Orlin's reservation with Jade Regent, but I'm not entirely sure I understood what he was saying. It also wasn't on the list of one the games Cursario offered to run - any reason why? Most likely because you don't own it. :)
Anyways, I strongly feel that the love interests inherent in that campaign would work really well with this group of players *and* characters. Heck, we could even change the caravan from that campaign into the carnival from this game and keep a lot of our NPC's and love interests going! It could really work well.
I was planning on going through the past few pages to see what everyone was and wasn't willing to play, but haven't had the time yet.
Regarding point buy, I'm ok with either. I tend to have unoptimized stats anyways, so extra point buy really only opens up classes that are much more MAD.
I'd be game for Jade Regent too, if that's what people want to do - I do love [NPC from RotRL redacted to avoid spoilers]. :)
|
Ok, as I understand we have two options:
- Tie-up this module, make a nice "they lived happily forever after" and then start a new game, now with an Adventure Path, Giant Killer, with new characters (nothing against using the same one).
- Continue playing this characters in a homebrew campaign
It depends on Pavo's vote if to tie the options or moving us to killing giants.
About Jade Regent... I didn't like it much...
Fair enough. Not every campaign is for everyone. :)
A third option - some of the characters from this module continue on and some of them stay in town. Then new characters join those that continue on to start the next campaign.
I would like to do Giant Slayer. It's one of the few adventure paths that I haven't done yet.
No interaction with them whatsoever. Part of me's a little curious, but the other part's frankly not that into super-high-powered games. In our last game, my IRL group ended up, for several reasons, beating the ghost wyrm red dragon BBEG in the final fight before it even got to act. It was one of the most unsatisfying moments I could imagine.
I'm weird - the first five or six levels are actually my favorite part of the game, before you start getting all the super powerful abilities. Nothing wrong with high levels, but I don't know, the lower levels just seem more enjoyable to me.
But if others want to do Mythic, I'm game - I'm flexible and I learn quickly. :)
I've played the Mythic Rules once and have tried to implement them as a GM once (campaign died after the second session, we tried playing too many different games at once).
I think they're a lot of fun, but they massively increase the power of the PC's. Even Wrath of the Righteous - a campaign designed for mythic characters - is said to become too easy for the PC's after they become mythic. And they're fighting mythic foes!
So a few options
1) Realize that the PCs are powerful and just live with it
2) Only use a few mythic tiers so they don't get *too* powerful
3) Up the power of the bad guys to match (may be difficult)
4) Only use mythic rules for bad guys (creates a greater challenge for PCs)
I'll be happy with any of those options or even not using them at all. The rules are a lot of fun, but they do change the power dynamic of the PCs vs bad guys, and it can be easy to go too far in either direction - too easy for PCs or too difficult for PCs (of course, if you go by the same game design philosophy I ascribe to, nether of those are an issue).
Edit: One important thing to note is that if you go by that design philosophy I linked to, then we really should implement a mechanic to judge the relative power level of opponents compared to ourselves. Such a mechanic does not exist in PF, and if you put your PCs up against opponents who massively out-power them, then there's no way for the PCs to determine when to not engage (aka when to run). If requested, I can give plenty of examples where this has been an issue - even monster descriptions are not good enough to determine "fight or flee."
Would the advanced class guide be allowed? I've been itching to figure out that mess of a shaman class.
Our shaman in our last game was a lot of fun, but he was also way held back, since he was a GMPC. I can see how they'd get pretty stupid powerful played to their full potential.
I really have no idea how they're supposed to be played. One of my players tried to make one, and I tried to help him out. Then we gave up.
I'm not 100% set either on keeping Orlin, or rerolling. As for Mythic, I've heard the stories, but I'm optimistic if the tiers are kept low.
I'll read the player's guide, see if that sparks things.
For the record, powerful characters is never a bad thing. It's much easier to compensate for than...
"were a bunch of wimps, let's go save the world! What do you mean TPK? We lost one initiative, one save and the Fighter missed."
Compromise, 30 point-buy... No Mythic.
25 point-buy, gestalt.