Will get something up in the game play thread soon. Thanks for your patience.
-Posted with Wayfinder
Just an FYI, Judge Dairmid IS female; an old friend, possibly with benefits, of Professor Lorrimer.
Ok. I've gone through the thread with a closer look at the NPCs. The Daramid mistake was just a mistake. Confused Daramid with Aldaar on gender, but I stand by the rest of my portrayals.
Otto: Although well educated and intelligent, Otto is not immune to the bigotry of Lepidstadt and believes the Beast is guilty. Together with his trio of legal advisers, he aims to see the Beast burn, and fights tooth and nail to prove his case.
Khard: A dour man in his eighties, Chief Justice Khard speaks with a deep, commanding voice and suffers no nonsense in his court. The Chief Justice carries the court gavel—a mallet of black ebony the Justice uses to keep order—and wears a huge cartwheel ruff to make him look even more imposing. He has the power to have people removed from court, discount evidence, and issue punishments (up to hanging) for lying to the court. Any levity in the court is punished for those who take his court too lightly.
Gustav: Barrister Gustav Kaple has been appointed as the Beast’s defender. Gustav believes the Beast is guilty as well, but he feels honor-bound to give the creature the fairest trial possible. Unfortunately, when standing in front of the full courtroom, Gustav’s nervous stutter makes his speeches almost unintelligible.
I tossed the stutter, but, other than that, that is how I have tried to portray those that have had any role in the proceedings thus far.
Is there anything in particular that you think I should look at?
---
Also, the letter from Grine is still missing and you don't know why.
I've no problem with the portrayals so far. I also figured the gender thing was an error, easily made in a game situation like this, and I apologize if my note seemed rude.
Also, I agree with the response to Eloise; in fact, she probably should have been punted from the court when she cast her spell; they have (IIRC) a Pharasmin cleric monitoring for just that sort of behavior.
I'm enjoying this as me...Iesha is totally embarrassed, though.
Iesha's better suited than I to judge if your portrayals fit the NPCs as they are described in the adventure path--she's read it, I haven't.
I'm only concerned with how the NPCs' current behavior matches up with the impressions I had of them before. I'm jarred by moments such as, "The Chief Justice leers at Sour Heck..." The chief justice never struck me as the leering type, y'know?
"...[the two other judges] are clearly uninterested in his testimony." Really? After days of fairly compelling evidence, the judge who hired us to investigate is uninterested in what we turned up? It makes sense that Sour Heck's grandstanding would get him in trouble--that's consistent with how the court's run before, and honestly if he wasn't ruffling feathers I'd feel I hadn't done my job. But the judges finding him insubordinate is completely different from the judges closing their ears to him.
To me it feels as if this third day in court has no context from the other two--that the party has earned no good will or credit with the judges from the previous days of evidence and testimony, or from fending off the mob. I don't see any acknowledgement that Sour Heck was starting to win humorless old Khard over, or that Otto's first objections to Heck's antics are coming pretty late in the proceedings.
I guess it's not just the NPCs that seem inconsistent to me, but the tone of the game. Previous GMs seemed to be measuring Sour Heck's credibility with the court through a series of skill checks, whereas it seems to me you're deciding how credible they find him based on how you'd think Heck would do in a modern court of law. But a modern court wouldn't try a capital case in a single day. Modern courts don't have Pharasman values, bardic traditions, or a history of troubles with evil fey and the undead. Modern courts don't have plucky adventurers. In a modern court, Sour Heck can't be a fool and a hero; he can only be a fool. Is that the sort of game we're in now?
Nope! Not rude, Iesha!
Also, yup, there is a Pharasmin Cleric monitoring the courtroom for spells.
---
Took a few days to think this over and go back and do some reading.
Leering in the "suggestive" sense is not what was meant. He was giving you "a sidelong glance". The other meaning of leer.
Even a judge on your side is going to become bored or frustrated when you are obstinate, pose rhetorical questions as answers, berate both the judges and the audience, mock the prosecutor, etc. She vouched for you and now you are monologuing on the stand in response to simple questions after you were given free rein to monologue all you want when Gustav called you.
When a child whines over and over, you tune them out. Essentially, it was a case of Sour Heck being insubordinate to such a degree that the pair just tuned out because they aren't interested in the Sour Heck show.
You say that you started to win over Khard by getting him to crack a smile. But then you continuously violated the rules of court and his own decrees in court and that is definitely going to set you back.
Otto's objections coming late in proceeding might be valid, if I had GMed the entire thing for you, but we both know that is not the case. I'm not going to insult you by fabricating something whole cloth for why the lawyers were completely inept prior to this, but this is how I'm running it and having inept lawyers is just boring. No one would watch the second half of Law and Order if Jack McCoy wasn't awesome and just let the defense do whatever they wanted.
I don't ask for skill checks regularly when you are roleplaying. I will occasionally ask for one if I feel one is necessary, but you lot are fairly good roleplayers. No need to worry about skill checks for this type of thing when your own story-telling narrative can suffice, however, this is a loose RP area and I am applying both real world experience and dramatic understanding of courts. Courts in the 1500s wouldn't have put up with this type of behavior either. Constant defiance of the judges and prosecutor can only make you the fool, not the hero.
I'm not sure what you mean by this court having a Pharasmin value system or bardic traditions or trouble with fey and undead, but I don't really see that as relevant.
As to the underlying message here, I want to address it head on. This game has taken a different tone from before. This is for one reason: it is now a GM Bold Strider game. It is not a GM Aest game any more, a DM Corvus game or a GM Storycrafter game anymore. GMs have different styles and different ideas on how to run things. I'm not really sure what to say beyond that.
I was on a pretty fantastic fencing team in high school. None of the other high schools had teams, so we took on the local universities and regularly beat them. One of my teammates joined the US women's Olympic team; two others are Dons in the SCA.
One night after practice, we put "The Princess Bride" on the VCR. Fantastic movie, right? We were all having a great time with it...until one damp gym sock started complaining about the fencing. "It's so staaaaged," he complained. "They're not even trying to hit each other. They look like they're trying to play pattycake." Ugh. Yeah, dramatic swordplay is like professional wrestling. You have to suspend belief and enjoy it.
That's the problem we seem to be running into, here. Not many real world judges would let a charismatic witness take over the proceedings, but it happens in drama all the time. I feel a little like GM Bold Strider is watching Miracle on 34th Street, and saying "It's so staaaaged. No real judge would declare a homeless crazy man to be Santa Claus!"
I don't know how to work a real courtroom; I don't care to learn how to. I don't know to play a drum; I don't care to learn how to. I don't know how to fire a sling; I don't care to learn how to. Now, if I gave a dramatic description of Sour Heck using his sling and a GM said, "That's not how it looks when you use a sling, so you miss automatically," I'd feel the GM was being unfair. If I gave a dramatic description of the music he played on his drum, and the GM said, "The people at my jazz club hate that kind of drumming, so I'm going to give you a bunch of negatives on your perform check," I'd feel the GM was being unfair. And when Bold Strider writes Heck can't charm the court because he doesn't think what I've written would fly in a real court of law, I feel he is being unfair.
This is not an episode of Law and Order; Jack McCoy/Otto is not the protagonist. This is not a court on Earth in the 1500s. Sour Heck is a bard; this is a Varisian culture. Bards play an important social role as the preservers of the people's common history and values. This is a Pharasman society, true neutral; the pursuit of truth is considered more important than the strict rule of law. This is a nation that knows the terror of evil creatures that strike in the night, and relies on heroic individuals to keep them at bay.
Perhaps the court feels angry rather than ashamed when Sour Heck points out their prejudices; perhaps the judges feel bored rather than entertained when he cracks wise; perhaps they side with Otto instead of Heck when the bard ridicules the lawyer's poor arguments. But I hear the GM saying that Heck's approach fails automatically, and I feel the the ethos of Pathfinder is that this sort of decision should be left to the dice.
Thanks for listening to my concerns--I've always felt that in a good game, the participants need to be able to express themselves freely and work with each other as adults. But I strongly feel that this is not just a GM Bold Strider game; it is a GM Bold Strider and Eloise and Iesha and Peredur and Sour Heck game. I want our GM to be able to run the game and have fun with it, but I think to do that he needs to understand what the players' expectations are.
I think the difference here is you (as an RL lawyer) are thinking real court drama, where we're thinking Perry Mason.
OK, my take so far...I can see the court getting annoyed with Sour Heck's performance, especially Judge Khard. Iesha wanted to facepalm at least once...as I said, Iesha's embarrassed, I'm having fun. This is the most exciting version of this particular court sequence I've seen - and I've run it twice myself, once in RL and once here in a PBP.
For most GMs, like myself, who no nothing about real courtrooms, it's simple: follow the script, check to see if all the important clue points are hit, keep track of earned bonuses, and check the rolls. It was written that way because, frankly, it's easier for Paizo to set up such a simple & reusable system, ready for use elsewhere should they decide to have yet another trial in an AP.
I can, OTOH, see where that might be frustrating for you, wanting to bring a touch of realism into the court. I think it's a good thing we're having this discussion, so that we can (hopefully) all wind up an the same (enjoyable for all) page.
So, let's try to clear this up...I'm more in the RP/Perry Mason line; you're in a more realistic (Law & order?) type set-up, where does everyone else stand? And, how do we meet in the middle?
Oh, and a quick, amusing, and irrelevant sideline: when I showed my RL group Judge Diarmid's picture in the module they immediately decided she was evil and planning to backstab them. I think they were quite disappointed that she didn't.
Oh, and a quick, amusing, and irrelevant sideline: when I showed my RL group Judge Diarmid's picture in the module they immediately decided she was evil and planning to backstab them. I think they were quite disappointed that she didn't.
No spoilers, Iesha! :)
An aside--I'm not aware that Diarmid endorsed us for anything. She actually asked us to keep our connection to her a secret, and we've done that.
I suspect we can claim we were working for the court under Barrister Kaple and believed we had the authority to search the place for clues after evidence led us there. We'd need to remind the court of that specific evidence, as well.
Oh SCA fencing...
--
I agree that we should hash it out as adults because we will not make it the two years + for an AP otherwise.
---
Anyway, I get what you are saying, but that is exactly who I am. I am the guy who points out inaccuracies in Law and Order (arguably the most spot on courthouse drama of our time). I don't apologize for it and I don't expect you to get every detail of a courtroom, but I feel like I have been heavy-handed with the hints about what not to do, yet you still do it. What would you have me do? Let you openly mock people in court and just handwave it? I'm honestly at a loss.
I am on the side of the player, but I'm not going to let egregious behavior sit unattended to without reproach. And when I mentioned that it was out of line, you doubled down. If you think this is unreasonable, then I honestly am at a loss.
--
I do think that this is a cooperative game. It is not a GM Bold Strider game. It is a GM Bold Strider + Sour + Iesha ad naseum game. However, pretty much half of the game falls to the GM, so a change in GM is going to change the tone. That is just how it is.
I can't budge on that as I cannot expect myself to GM as someone else would.
--
I only didn't let you roll because 1) you were very roleplay-centric and I whole-heartedly believe that roleplay > rollplay. I encourage words and motvations to supersede a d20 roll, however this also means that any roleplay is also subject to my interpretation. I cannot think of any court where literally mocking the prosecutor, yelling at the judges, prosecutors and audience, and making a scene where you storm off would be even remotely permissible.
You seem to be under some notion that you behavior affects the outcome of the trial. It did, but you have presented irrefutable evidence. Fair enough. As you say, it is a Pharasmin court. They value truth, however you have literally been the worst possible witness in even Perry Mason history. I cannot stress how bad you have been. Like, so bad. A roll of even 20 cannot redeem you yourself, but these are not idiots on the bench. Don't think that everything I say is indication of something.
As a reveal into my mindset, the judges, at this point, are in favor of the defendant, 2 to 1 due to the evidence submitted, however they are extremely tired of the Sour Heck show.
--
If you want to be more Perry Mason, then wait for closing arguments or take more time when Gustav let you have the stand, but don't try to monologue while under cross. That is literally the opposite of what you should ever do.
--
This may seem passionate, but I'm just putting myself forward for you to see how I see it. I am open to suggestion and I am all for a resolution where we can find common ground.
That seems fair enough, Strider.
I'm fine with the passionate closing remarks.
What would you have me do? Let you openly mock people in court and just handwave it? I'm honestly at a loss..
Let's take the crowd's reaction to Sour Heck's initial testimony, where he berated them for their prejudice.
Consider the possibility that the crowd might react to being castigated in different ways, depending on the skill of the orator chastising them.
They might simply get angry.
Then again, they might be ashamed. They might finally grasp that the hate they've directed at the Beast is baseless. Would this happen in real life? Eh, probably not. Does it happen in drama? All the time.
GM Bold Strider decided the crowd would be infuriated. Why not allow for the possibility that Sour Heck's charisma and skill at public speaking would leave them shocked and squirming? Why not allow him a Diplomacy check, in short?
I'm not asking anyone to handwave things in Heck's favor. I feel it's unfair to handwave things against him. Consider the possibility that an extraordinary personality might touch people's hearts just as an extraordinary warrior might fight off a score of lesser swordsmen. In a game where characters slay literal demons, why not allow them a chance to defeat people's inner demons?
I think we've all met people who can insult us to our face and make us laugh at ourselves. Heck was conceived as one of those charming fools who can get away with saying wildly inappropriate things thanks to impeccable comic timing. I'm now worried that post-trial, whenever I write him using black humor or insult comedy on NPCs, the result will be naked hostility rather than the startled laughter which up until now was the usual result--his "take ten", if you will.
Tell me straight up, GM Bold Strider--will I be crippling the group if I keep playing my character the way I always have?
I don't think that's what he's saying, Sour Heck. I think he's saying that, in this particular case, Sour Heck is slightly over the line.
OK, just a personal situation that reminds me of this a bit: I am running a Runelords game RL for a small group (which is now smaller), the group consists/consisted of 3 long-time players; my husband, our daughter, and a long-term (10+ years) friend. We added 2 new players to the game, one of whom matches our playstyle well. The other was a nice person, but with a playstyle totally different from ours. Some of the issues were my fault (hey, I'm not perfect) and some were just playstyle differences that came to a head over something he wanted to do (drain Claybottom lake) which I felt was both unnecessary and impossible in the timeframe of the game. After great deal of debate, I told him he could try, but pointed out how long it would take, the effects on the local area and the lands downstream and the ultimate consequences. He quit over what he felt was my 'teasing' him over allowing it when I wasn't actually going to.
I don't want to lose Sour Heck over this.
I should jolly well hope so.
SH is one of the highlights of this AP!
Agreed. I don't think that there is any need for someone to leave the game.
Sour Heck's style is not going to be effective in all situations and this is one of those situations. If he is going to stick to the same schtick, then he will find that situations like this arise, but he will also find plenty of situations where it works surprisingly well.
Generally, if a tactic is not working very well, then I will drop hints that maybe a different tactic might work better.
Your character and portrayal will not cripple the group in all situations, most situations or even half of the situations. Most of the situations will find it mediocre to amazing, but there is an occasional situation where insult comedy is really just a bad idea and this just happens to be one of them.
Okay, let's try to get things moving again. To the gameplay thread, people! Pooooost!
OK, no easy way to say this. At my last performance appraisal, I was told that now that I'm a section head my management expects me to do more at work. Between that and my wife having more time next semester to do things outside of work, I won't have time to keep up with this campaign. I'm sorry to drop it now, but "If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly." See you all around the boards.
Ahh. I'll miss having you around, but I am happy for your good fortunes in life. Best of luck!
Sad, but I'm glad that you have had such good luck! Stay in touch!
Now that we are three, how should we rectify this? We can do the trial with three, but the rest of the AP will probably need a fourth, unless you want me to run a GMPC (background character who does relatively little outside of combat).
Sorry to see you go, Peredur. I think you and I were the only remaining originals?
For now, a GMPC could work (I used Imrijka when I needed one), then go ahead and recruit.
It's been a pleasure playing with you through the years, Peredur. When your life is less complicated, let's meet up for a drink. Good luck with your new job responsibilities, as GM Carbide, and with your other gaming fun.
Am I right in assuming that right after the trial would be a good place to take stock and decide whether to wrap things up gracefully or recruit?
If we decide to wrap things up, then we would be finishing the second book halfway through, so there would be no Chronicle issued.
If you are ok with that, then we can do so, but I just wanted to be clear. The second half of the book is the more standard dungeon crawl, similar to Book 1.
That being said, evaluating after the trial would be a natural pausing point, yes.
Merry Christmas, everyone! ^_^
Holidays have been rough. I haven't forgotten about you guys! In fact, I have someone from my local lodge that is interested in joining the group as the fourth if you are all amenable to continuing. I am meeting up with them on Monday to see if she wants to.
Additionally, I will have a post up tonight, so prepare your wordsmithing on constructs, Eloise!
Sure, bring her over so we can get an eyefull. ;)
I'll start flexing my magical muscles for the filibuster... :p
I have someone from my local lodge that is interested in joining the group as the fourth if you are all amenable to continuing.
Well done. May I suggest we try to draft a fifth and possibly even a sixth player as well, if we seem to be approaching a natural jumping-on point in the narrative? I feel like four people is kind of a bare minimum, and having more will future-proof us against other folks needing to drop out because of RL issues. Also, having two or three folks come on board at the same time seems to bolster everyone's feeling of community--I know joining at the same time Eloise did made me more involved in the game.
Maybe we could throw open our recruitment thread?
I'm back. Sorry about the delay in posting. Holidays, retail work schedules, and, of course, The Force Awakens.
Good movie, see it if you haven't, it's best in 3d where available.
@Sour Heck: Found two more! :D All three should check in today or tomorrow.
Current Roster:
Sour Heck - Talker, Jokester, Carries a big stick with a banner on it.
Eloise - Likes her sword a lot, moves fast and hits hard, knowledgable about boring stuff
Iesha - Quiet, likes to make sure that people aren't dead as well as pretty things
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Don't forget I'm also magical artillery backup and a kickass singer. ;)
Welcome Baveyo! Let us know if you would like to collaborate on background, brainstorm ways to bring you in, or whatever.
|
Hi, it's Baveyo. I'm ready to rock 'n roll.
I'll be playing Gruoch, a lvl 5 human witch. She is Chaotic Neutral, carries around her dearest Chuck, a scorpion familiar, and is looking to get into some trouble. She also dons a grey mithril shield with two crossed sable daggers on it.
I trust you all will devise a way to bring her into the story. But I'm good to go.
Hello all! My name is Jill and I'm excited to be joining this game! It will be my first play by post. I had been playing Carrion Crown with a group locally but then life happened and people moved and such so I'm excited to get to experience and complete this story! Also, since getting a job at my FLGS I haven't been able to get much gaming time in for myself. Hopefully this format will allow me to get some of my rpg/pathfinder fix. My paladin of Pharasma is currently being built and I'm looking forward to introducing her to you all and meeting both you and your characters as well :)
Welcome to both of you. ^_^
Greetings, I am Baveyo's friend and will be bringing a ranged paladin of Erastil to the fight if there is still room for him. Will be having him posted here later tonight if all goes well!
Welcome, all. I'm interested to meet your characters and find out their backstories.
Gruoch, as far as bringing your character (or any of your characters) into the story goes, I think we should have similar motives for our characters, since we can't be sure where the story goes next. Before the current party got involved with the trial of the Beast, our characters were hunting for the Whispering Way, a cabal of necromancers who killed an old friend of ours. If any of you had knowledge of or previous dealings with the Whispering Way--if they did you wrong, or you were hunting them--that could be a strong way to connect to our party's mission.
Hey Jill, excited to have you join. This game is my first PBP too. Did you get this far in Carrion Crown, or further? I didn't know Pharasma blessed paladins--she's a neutral deity, right, neither lawful or good?
And Castoris, good to have you coming in too. Are you going to connect your back story to Gruoch's? Or perhaps all three of you would like to be connected: family, old friends, or sworn allies? For that matter, you're welcome to name yourselves relatives or buddies of Heck's and come in that way. I'm sure Eloise and Iesha would be open to that idea too. Have a look at our backgrounds, and see if there's anything there that meshes with your ideas for your characters.
About Jill's Paladin: It is GM-approved.
Sorry. Very tired just now. Will post asap. ^^
Amaia (ah-may-ah) the Harbinger is what she goes by. But May works for a shorter/nickname in combat and such. My noob status is about to show, how do you get the stats and such blue and to stay up top? Is there some sort of signature button I'm missing? I wanna post her!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Put them in the Race & Class sections of your profile. [*ooc] in front and [*/ooc] at the end tuns them blue. (Leave out the *)
Peredur has left us and Iesha has not posted in Gameplay for two weeks, so I am going to speed us through the rest of the trial to get the three pending players into the mix.
Sour Heck and Eloise: You did a fantastic job on the stand. I personally loved the effort you put into your posts. We may have disagreed a bit on the tactics early on, but it resolved itself quite well, I think.
A group of adventurers have made their presence known in Lepidstadt and you have traveled all of this way to join them in seeking out these masters of the arcane and divine. Either to learn from them directly or to take their power for your own.
(Sound good?)
Thank you for the compliment. ^_^
Hint: This is where you lot need to roleplay to get a new party member on board.
As this is a good point (almost all RP as you get the party members on board), then you all should level up to level 6!
Also, if we can make sure the post rate stays high, then we can move on to Schloss Caromarc more quickly.
Schloss Caromarc? What am I missing?
Here’s what I choose for Sour Heck at the new level up:
Skills Gained: Disguise +1, Escape Artist +1, Knowledge (Planes) +1, Perform (Percussion) +1, Perception +1, Sense Motive +1, Stealth +1.
Bard Spell Gained: Mirror Image. Dirge Bard Necromancy Spell Gained: False Life. Human Alternate Favored Class Bonus Spell: Unseen Servant
He also gains 7 hit points, 2 performance rounds, and the Suggestion bardic performance; increases BAB and saves, and can cast another 2nd level spell per day.
Oops, sorry. That is where you are going next once we finish the trial.