In a similar manner that a natural 20 requires a 'confirmation roll', may a suggest that a critical fumble also require some sort of confirmation roll.
That seems fair enough - does anyone know how the 'official' critical fumble rules work? I'm not sure if they're a Paizo Pathfinder thing or a throw-back to the 3.5 days?
Conveniently, Bonegrit and Samair just demonstrated for us the kind of outcome rolling a natural 1 might have on a skill check. Not catastrophic, but raising the stakes in an exciting kind of way.
I'm a big fan of critical hits and fumbles. But, I would caution you against using the Critical Fumble Deck. My tabletop group used it for a while and ultimately discarded it. The Fumbles ranged from reasonable (You are dazed for 1 round, DC14 negates), to insane (You are teleported to another plane), to incredibly deadly (You take 1d2 Constitution Bleed), etc...
I'm less enthusiastic about using it on skills. The reason, for me, is that success/failure is kind of hardwired into skill checks. Try Again is allowed for some, where failure is not absolute, and is denied for those where it is. Certain skills have greater consequences if you fail by a five or more (the difference between "making no progress" and "falling" when you use Climb). Also, some things are just too easy for some people to fail at, or too difficult to ever be accomplished. There's nothing wrong with this. Some things are just beyond a persons abilities.
EDIT:
Conveniently, Bonegrit and Samair just demonstrated for us the kind of outcome rolling a natural 1 might have on a skill check. Not catastrophic, but raising the stakes in an exciting kind of way.
Yeah, I'll agree with this. Using it in a narrative way, like this, is quite entertaining. The above statement refers to more mundane skill use. "Rolling a 1 while swimming in calm water with a +15 to your swim check doesn't mean you start sinking" kind of thing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ride Check: 1d20 + 9 ⇒ (18) + 9 = 27
That ought to get you back into the race! =)
Just to clarify quickly Pyotr, 1s and 20s wouldn't mean auto-fails or successes for skill checks, simply that something uncool happens on a 1 and something cool happens on a 20, irrespective of the outcome of the skill check.
So in the example above, rolling a 1 whilst swimming in calm water with a +15 bonus to your swim check wouldn't mean you sink, you continue to swim just fine, but perhaps your money purse comes loose from your belt, or a passing seagull unloads its bowels on your head, or you spot a distant fin cutting through the waters ahead of you.
Thank you and good night :-)
Here go my comments...
While I DMed a couple of magi (got one right now), I've never played one but I think they're a decent option.
I purchased a spellbook, a spell component pouch, and then an 'adventurer's kit' (32 gp), leaving me 110 gp left. I can detail what's in the 'adventurer's kit' if needed but it will be stuff like backpack, bedroll, flint and steel, rope, etc. Don;t worry as I'm not going to pull out any 'hard to get items'. I usually tell my players NOT to detail unless it's something an adventurer normally would NOT have but YMMV so let me know.
The spellbook has 100 pgs of which 21 have been used (15 0-level and 6 1-level spells) so 79 pages left blank; I look forward to gaining additional spells.
I'd like to acquire a Vigilant Rouncey; I am used to riding Signior, a beautiful chestnut who has saved my butt more than once and I may be able to buy it from the city's scouting unit...
With Pyotr's permission... I have seen the paladin praying in the cathedral and have often wondered why he didn't 'hang out' with the other paladins; I intend to find out. Also I want to play Pellius as a paladin wanna-be who unfortunately didn't have more time to dedicate to 'paladin study' because of his passion with magic. In fact I may even dip in a paladin level or acquire a paladin-like feat in the future. His current alignment is chaotic good, should I change that? I sort of started playing him as lawful good (i.e., job interview).
We'll see where our relationship with Dierik takes us...
Make sure you include some nasty orc lady when you plot out Pellius' brother future as he always thought himself as a lady's man. :)
Thanks for the review and I look forward to further comments. I even accept PC's comments. :)
I know I'm getting ahead of myself but how 'organic' will you be when it comes time to level up?
For example, if we have been going through plains and mountains, would a ranger be able to acquire 'jungle' as his favorite terrain?
Sard's a good horse as long as you don't push her. If Pellius has no luck acquiring horses elsewhere, Dunagan would allow him to purchase her. So far Dunagan's supplies and equipment could be carried on Cornaliium.
I hesitate to broach this subject, because I don't want to ignite a "Pally Debate", and I certainly would never inhibit or curtail another player's character development.
I doubt Pyotr does, or will ever, view himself as a 'Paladin', assuming that's even in fact a 'thing' to be. Just like if Pyotr asked Pellius, "Why did you become a gish?" it would probably confuse him. Pellius is a soldier, with some magical abilities that he would like to improve. Pyotr is an acolyte and devotee, who is defending Lastwall with his strength. I don't really think there were 'paladin studies' that he engaged in.
Now if you want to know about his time as an acolyte, or his martial training, etc., I can certainly work with that. And if Pellius would like to move closer to 'Divine Grace' (see what I did there?), then I can work with that, too.
I doubt Pyotr does, or will ever, view himself as a 'Paladin', assuming that's even in fact a 'thing' to be. Just like if Pyotr asked Pellius, "Why did you become a gish?" it would probably confuse him.
While a 'gish' is not a known term in the Pathfinder setting, Paladin and Magus are. If you asked Pellius why he became a 'Magus' he would be less confused, as you probably wouldn't be overly confused if someone asked Pyotr why he is a Paladin (although, he may not see himself as a paladin, he could understand why someone 'may' confuse him with one). Like you said, there are stigmas behind the labeling of someone as a Paladin, but ultimately that is what Pyotr is. From everything you have said it all matches up - he is devoted to battling evil (although perhaps in a more humane way than most) and upholding Iomedae's virtues.
At this level its probably perfectly reasonable for most people to just see him as a devout warrior. But as he moves higher in level (around level 3) he will become distinctly more and more 'paladin-y' from the use of his special abilities and auras. Still, this can be reasonably assumed as something else, especially if Pyotr doesn't take on the typical Paladin stereotypes such as gaudy armor with holy symbols.
But I must ask, why do you have such an aversion to the label?
As was said before, Pyotr thinks himself as an 'acolyte and devotee' but so do most other soldiers in Lastwall; that is how I see Pellius so it's all a matter of 'levels'.
This all stems on how you see 'powers' are acquired and will become more evident as the PC gains level.
Why is Pyotr able to 'lay on hands' and Pellius isn't? Maybe Pellius prays just as much and is as devoted as Pyotr.
So it begs the question, was Pyotr 'selected' by Iomedae or was he taught by some other 'devoted soldiers' (aka paladins) how to channel the goddess' grace? In either of those cases, Pyotr becomes more and more like other 'special devoted warriors' that people have come to call 'paladins'.
Pellius wants to become like the 'paladins' and thinks (maybe he's wrong) that the way to do so is to 'study and devote' oneself for longer periods of time that his other study (magic) leaves open for him. Thus his 'problem', i.e. should I spend more time studying magic or devoting myself to Iomedae.
Interesting view points, please expand on them.
It is too bad Iomedae doesn't have the magic domain. Pellius could be devoting himself to the god by devoting himself to magical pursuits. You are definitely in a peculiar position with the Magus. Perhaps Pellius could view Iomedae's lack of blessings, despite his convictions, as a sign that she wishes him to pursue magic?
It's not an aversion, so much as a habit. And probably one I've had since childhood. Growing up, you couldn't ever just BE a Paladin. You were a fighter, a thief, or a magic user. Paladin was a prestige class, after a fashion. You had to be very, VERY honorable and very dedicated to become one. It didn't matter what your base class or classes was/were.
Also, I just don't picture people using the term in quasi-real-life parlance. That may just be my personal skewed viewpoint, though. Cleric, wizard, monk seem to fit ok. It's not just paladin. I don't really picture anyone referring to themselves or others as a "fighter" or "barbarian" either. Well, maybe barbarian as an insult of sorts. But, I would think warrior, soldier, swordman, brawler, mercenary, etc. are more likely, and more descriptive.
Pyotr wants to be a knight, not in the "land and titles" sense, but in the Arthurian style. I suspect that Vigil's knights are made up of all kinds of classes. At the least, all the full BAB classes, plus Clerics, Magi, Bards, and who knows what else...? Certainly there are probably multi-classed knights, holy vindicators, divine scions, battle heralds, crusaders, chavaliers, stalwart defenders, etc... it all just depends on how you parse it out.
Come to think of it, Pellius have you looked at the Chevalier? It's a really great prestige class for CG not-a-paladin-Paladins. Could be just what you're thinking about for Pellius to grow into.
Pyotr wants to be a knight, not in the "land and titles" sense, but in the Arthurian style. I suspect that Vigil's knights are made up of all kinds of classes. At the least, all the full BAB classes, plus Clerics, Magi, Bards, and who knows what else...? Certainly there are probably multi-classed knights, holy vindicators, divine scions, battle heralds, crusaders, chavaliers, stalwart defenders, etc... it all just depends on how you parse it out.
Come to think of it, Pellius have you looked at the Chevalier? It's a really great prestige class for CG not-a-paladin-Paladins. Could be just what you're thinking about for Pellius to grow into.
Hey, those are some very strong 3 levels! I never knew these existed but alas it's not for Pellius.
I have even questioned Pellius' chaotic good alignment. I gave him that to start with but then realized that he's really more lawful good (as I've started playing him). I'm waiting on input from the DM to see if I officially change this.
Staying on topic, by just 'looking at someone, how do you know he's a magus or just a fighter/mage? Is she a paladin or a cleric of Iomedae? The list goes on and on.
To make this brief, Pellius is a very pious soldier who is very devoted to Iomedae. He's also troubled for not being able to devote more time to Iomedae because of his magical studies. All this is character development to make these characters become more alive.
I still think that Pellius will 'pester' (in a good way) Pyotr about his faith.
@Dunagan: Are you Ok with Pellius having visited your shop many times to get 'work done' (weapons, armor, stuff for horses, etc.)?
We need to find something in common...
@Delkaneth and Bonegrit: I don't want to leave the other two characters out but since they are not natives to Vigil but I'm open to ideas...
@Dunagan: Are you Ok with Pellius having visited your shop many times to get 'work done' (weapons, armor, stuff for horses, etc.)?
That's fine. As a side note, the Haarglicks are only known as weapon and armor smiths, and they only deal in high end merchandise - masterwork and above. Getting your horse shod would have been done elsewhere.
We need to find something in common...
Riding off on a caravan into the Hold of Belkzen ain't enough for ya? I'm not sure I can think up any commonalities unless Pellius likes dwarven women and maybe we could hook him up with Dunagan's sister? Heh, I am kidding... Or am I?
Here is how I see things, like real life and most games I have played in, there isn't much of a need to have commonalities between everyone in the group. Most of the time bonds are formed between separate members, and those bonds keep the group together. For example, Dunagan shares the desire to uncover lost artifacts with Delk, Delk shares a common Chelaxian heritage with Pellius, Pellius shares his faith with Pyotr, Pyotr shares an orcish bond with Bonegrit... etc. Thus Dunagan and Pellius are linked through Delk. The makeup of molecules comes to mind. The atoms are bound together in the molecule, but not all atoms share a bond. The Hydrogen atoms in water are not connected to each other, but through the oxygen they become bound to one another...
Hey, those are some very strong 3 levels! I never knew these existed but alas it's not for Pellius.
Too bad... The moment I typed it, it struck me, "Hey! This is nearly a perfect fit!" Keep it on the back burner, at least. It's not alignment restricted and the prerequisites are negligible.
Staying on topic, by just 'looking at someone, how do you know he's a magus or just a fighter/mage? Is she a paladin or a cleric of Iomedae? The list goes on and on.
Yeah, I think that was mostly my point. In the sort of "real world" that is Golarion, you wouldn't say, "Hey, have you met Stan? He's a Fighter in the army. And Carl, here, is a Paladin in the same unit."
To make this brief, Pellius is a very pious soldier who is very devoted to Iomedae....
I still think that Pellius will 'pester' (in a good way) Pyotr about his faith.
No problem. We're both adherents, with sword marks, serving the Precentors Martial. We should get along famously!
I wouldn't worry about finding commonality. This is moving along much more naturally than most games I've been in. Usually, you are thrown into a situation with several other people, and just expected to immediately get to know one another, and trust and support one another. This way we, as players, are really getting to know the characters, and then we, as characters, are getting to know one another more incrementally and normally.
Hmmm, some interesting discussions going on here; I guess that’s why they call it the Discussion thread.
First in response to , and his character related questions.
I’d prefer it if you spelled out what’s in the adventurer’s kit to satisfy my slightly obsessive disorders (incidentally, I’m curious to know the source; I’ve seen mention of a few of these kits I’d they’d be a useful reference for my own PC creation). Not a pressing matter, but appreciated when you have a spare moment.
I don’t think the city of Vigil would be keen on selling off horses attached to its armed forces, but let’s say Pellius is friends with the stable master, who’s willing to sell Signior for 100 gold pieces. Otherwise, he can buy a different Vigiliant Rouncey from a civilian horse trader for 75 gold pieces.
If you want to change Pellius’ alignment, now's the time to do it. Lawful Good it is. I’d also be happy for Pellius to take some paladin levels later, or ‘paladin-like’ feats providing he met the prerequisites.
I know I'm getting ahead of myself but how 'organic' will you be when it comes time to level up?
For example, if we have been going through plains and mountains, would a ranger be able to acquire 'jungle' as his favorite terrain?
Pellius raises an important question here that has a bearing on everyone’s character. As much as I can, I want levelling up to be organic and make as much sense story-wise as possible. My enjoyment of the game stems from crafting an epic, believable tale, and as such, I want the mechanics and the narrative to be close bedfellows*.
So looking at Pellius’ example, I’d be unhappy if our ranger Bonegrit acquired ‘jungle’ as a favoured terrain if we hadn’t adventured there (and there’s no mention of jungles in his backstory). The on other hand, Pellius acquiring paladin levels down the line makes perfect sense considering his background.
With all the above having been said, I don’t want to impose on the choices you make whilst levelling your PCs.
Thus, if you plan on taking your PC in some unexpected directions, please let me know as early as possible. I’ll do everything I can to build a logical entry point into campaign play, supporting your build whilst maintaining verisimilitude**.
i.e. if your ranger wants jungle as a favoured terrain, I’ll try and find some jungles somewhere for him to explore and gain his new favoured terrain in a convincing way.
*Incidentally, I’m already trying to work out a plausible explanation as to why Pellius will suddenly have two more spells in his spellbook come 2nd level – and I’m fairly happy I’ve come up with an answer.
**No, I didn’t manage to spell this word correctly first time around.
I know I'm getting ahead of myself but how 'organic' will you be when it comes time to level up?
For example, if we have been going through plains and mountains, would a ranger be able to acquire 'jungle' as his favorite terrain?Pellius raises an important question here that has a bearing on everyone’s character. As much as I can, I want levelling up to be organic and make as much sense story-wise as possible. My enjoyment of the game stems from crafting an epic, believable tale, and as such, I want the mechanics and the narrative to be close bedfellows*.
That's great! I'm really digging this game.
OK, here's the next question along those lines...
Since this game will be a great story, how optimized will our characters need to be. For example, optimizing my magus entails getting feats like Intensify Spell and putting skill ranks into 'fly' to later become a flying death machine but...
I really would like to explore Pellius love of horses and take a feat like Animal Affinity and put skill ranks into handle animal.
However, if I 'go organic' and the rest of the characters are 'optimized' I'm doing a disfavor to the group by 'not pulling my weight'.
I hope what I'm saying makes sense so the question is: optimized or organic (story oriented) builds?
You can probably guess that I would like 'organic builds' but will optimize if that's what the group decides. However, bear in mind that if the DM 'adjusts' the encounters, this could be a great opportunity to go organic (and a break from optimization) for everyone.
Thoughts?
Hmmm, some interesting discussions going on here; I guess that’s why they call it the Discussion thread.
First in response to , and his character related questions.
Fair enough. LG it is, I'll detail items in his 'kit', and will acquire Signior. I'll change the alias today.
Please let me know if there's anything else.
I hope what I'm saying makes sense so the question is: optimized or organic (story oriented) builds?
My answer to this question is, "Yes".... Optimization and 'organic' builds do not have to be mutually exclusive. We all want to be good at what we do. While Dunagan is nowhere close in optimization to the "Travel" "Luck" (Or Liberation) domain cleric (and there are builds out there that would put that one to shame), I am going to make him pretty dang good at crafting magical items - thus optimizing in that aspect of the game. I say that if it makes sense, do it, even if you become 'optimized.' There are several GM tricks that can level the playing field with outright min/maxers and give the rest of the 'unoptimized' group members an enjoyable and fair challenge.
I will likely be adding levels of bard (at least 2) and going into a prestige class. Nothing mechanically unsound about any of that, but definitely not munchkin-min-max-optimized either. I tend to prefer well-rounded characters so I can participate in all of the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't have anything fancy lined up for Bonegrit. If something develops in-game to nudge me in a different direction, I may run with that, but nothing spontaneous or too dramatic should be in the works even if that's the case. As of this moment, I intend to just plod along the core Ranger path.
In regards to the "critical fumbles" I'm a huge fan of that. I actually concocted a homemade fumble chart for our RL gaming group, and it has went over well.
Hey Bonegrit, good to see ya again. I hope things are going as well as they can do. Do you think you're back to daily posts yet?
Well, it seems people are generally in favour of critical fumbles (incidentally Bonegrit, I’d love to get hold of a copy of your homebrew table). Taking your advice on board, I’ll avoid using the Critical Fumble deck. Also, as suggested by Pellius, there’ll be a confirmation roll on a critical fumble. Make a second attack roll, and if you miss again you confirm the critical fumble. Otherwise, it’s just a miss.
With skill checks, there’ll be no automatic successes or failures, but a natural 1 or 20 might result in something interesting happening (if inspiration strikes the DM).. We’ve already seen this in evidence recently, with Samair and Isabellina’s Arrow both getting natural 1s in the horse race and colliding with each other.
For example:
“By the barren breasts of the b%#$~ that birthed me!!” roars Grask Uldeth, as the self-proclaimed King of Urgir and Chieftain of the Empty Hand orcs hops on one leg, clutching his throbbing toe “Wretched dwarven stonework! Someone get a beardy out of the slave pits to fix this floor. And when he’s done, fire the little dirt-scraper from the Steel Eaters trebuchet!”
I’ll start posting House Rules like these on the Campaign Information tab for everyone’s reference.
Nothing anyone’s mentioned seems unreasonable. As the game progresses, just keep sharing your thoughts on where you want to take your character build wise.
I’ve already mentioned this, but it bears repeating, the benefit of this kind of sandbox style play is that I can tailor encounters to match the PCs ability. Thus optimization is not necessary. Feel free to be as good as you can at something (as Dunagan mentioned), but don’t feel constrained into making choices just because you feel you need them in order to survive.
My aim when building encounters is to challenge rather than overwhelm. PC death should not be a trivial event; but a rare occurrence that occurs only through incredibly bad luck dice roll wise, repeated unwise decisions, or breathtaking heroism and sacrifice on the part of the PC (and willingly accepted by the player).
I’ll probably be quite cautious at first when building combat encounters, then test PCs more as I get a better handle of your strengths and weaknesses in combat. On occasion I might get the balance wrong. One of the benefits of pbp’s more sedate pace is it’s easier to make small tweaks if needed.
On Spoilers
One more thing, when do we use the spoilers? Are we not supposed to read spoilers that are not for us. I love reading the 'story' and I'm mature enough to separate character from player knowledge so please expand on the use of spoilers.
On the whole, my policy is to spoilerize things happening just to one PC or group of PCs, depending how important I judge it to be. If other players want to click on the spoiler, I don’t have a problem with that, providing player knowledge is separated from character knowledge. However, I’m aware that some players might want to approach the story purely through the eyes of their character, which is why I’ve used the spoilers. If something monumentally important is affecting a PC that I don’t think the rest of the group should know, I’ll send them a PM.
I'd recommend players spoilerize based on whether I spoilerized whichever post you're reacting to.
When I spoilerize information dependent on a skill check I’d encourage players to resist the urge if they haven’t made the roll, but ultimately that’s not something I can police. If you sneak a peek, make sure the information doesn’t enter the mind of your PC.
"Hrrmmmm...." a low growl emerges from the back of Pyotr's throat. For just a moment, there is a gleam of the ferocity of his heritage in his eyes. "Inheritor protect the dwarves and their stone castles..."
Hey Bonegrit, good to see ya again. I hope things are going as well as they can do. Do you think you're back to daily posts yet?
Aye. I'm back in the saddle again. Sorry; couldn't resist.
"Garundi black witch!
"Graghh! Barkin' stone cobbled devils."
"Confounded, I'll forged, piece of Orc dung!" Dunagan huffs and snorts.
Hey Bonegrit, good to see ya again. I hope things are going as well as they can do. Do you think you're back to daily posts yet?Aye. I'm back in the saddle again. Sorry; couldn't resist.
Welcome back. We tried to keep it warm for you.
Welcome back. We tried to keep it warm for you.Hey Bonegrit, good to see ya again. I hope things are going as well as they can do. Do you think you're back to daily posts yet?Aye. I'm back in the saddle again. Sorry; couldn't resist.
He doesn't mean the dice... those have been pretty cold. =) Welcome back!
Hah! I can't complain, I'm still waiting for the inevitable triple-fumble to rear it's ugly head on me.
Pellius; please find below the details of your horse. Contrary to my earlier comments, I've given him a bonus feat as a reward for choosing the more expensive horse your character was attached to over the cheaper option. :-)
Signior, Vigilant Rouncey (light warhorse)
Breed trait: +3 bonus on Ride checks to avoid or leap over an obstacle.
Iron Will feat
16 hit points
House Rules plus a couple of other odds and ends, added to the Campaign Info tab.
Pellius; please find below the details of your horse. Contrary to my earlier comments, I've given him a bonus feat as a reward for choosing the more expensive horse your character was attached to over the cheaper option. :-)
Signior, Vigilant Rouncey (light warhorse)
Breed trait: +3 bonus on Ride checks to avoid or leap over an obstacle.
Iron Will feat
16 hit points
Thanks, I'll add Signior to my character sheet.
You can be fairly sure an epic scene like this was/is/will be taking place not far from our intrepid PCs.
Also, I'd do diabolical things to paint like Wayne Reynolds.
A little information on how I intend to run Perception checks during the campaign.
In many PbP games, it’s common practice to use a default ‘taking 10’ on Perception at all times. Although this simplifies matters, I don’t want to go in this direction in our campaign. I feel it takes the value away from good role-playing and the player’s guessing ‘something might be up’ from clues in the gameplay thread. Furthermore, it removes the chances of finding some well-hidden goodie on a particularly good roll, or the human* drama of accidentally missing an obvious clue.
Of course, this doesn’t mean to say you can’t Take 10 if you’ve got time, but this must be explicitly stated in your actions.
My usual modus operandi (oh look, I’m speaking Chelaxian) is to spoiler relevant information available via a Perception check. In some situations, I’ll just straight out ask for you to make a roll.
Very occasionally, I might make Perception checks in secret on your character’s behalf, if I feel that even just asking for a Perception check will be enough to make players suspicious**.
That being said, you are always at liberty to roll a Perception check at anytime if you have a hunch something might be up. In such instances, the player roll would always trump the DMs roll, even when a secret roll has already been made. The only exception to this would be trying to retcon Perception checks in after the fact (i.e. DM: the ninja ambushes you from the shadows of the arch , Player: actually my character happened to be staring into the shadows of the arch a few seconds ago. Can I roll Perception? DM: the poisoned blade enters your spleen . . .)
*Or dwarven, or half-orc.
** Not that I doubt your ability to separate player knowledge from character knowledge, it’s just that sometimes a good old-fashioned surprise does wonders for the circulation.
If it's alright, I'm going to go ahead and account for the 5th lap - there's a current chance of my being gone for the remainder of the night and morning in some old fashioned woe drowning revelry (sorta/not really - more like sharing drinks and good memories with similarly affected friends) and I don't want to halt the action if I can help it. If anything looks out of order in my post, feel free to Rule Zero it into the ground hah.
* So much for that rapport. Haha! Arrow just told Bonegrit "Shaddup, I got this!"
** And holy cow does he got this.
5th Lap Ride Checks: 3d20 + 27 ⇒ (20, 4, 20) + 27 = 71
Yowzers! Nice one! Sigh... I could've used that 60 gold... Lol!
I can bequeath you my belongings - what with the impending lynching and all.
Oh man... hahaha... rolled a -1 on diplomacy. I think I roleplayed it quite well.
Oh man... hahaha... rolled a -1 on diplomacy. I think I roleplayed it quite well.
Elegantly done master dwarf!