I don't know if joining another PBP would be the wisest thing I've done, but I do have a COCT-ready character -- in my aliases, Callie Cobalt, an arcane duelist bard. I was in a COCT campaign with her where the GM had to move and then didn't have time/interest to restart the game. We only got as far as finishing the fishery and moving into the next day.
If she looks like she'd be suitable for your game, let me know. I am also happy to bow out given it looks like there is other interest as well.
Sorry, I know this isn't a PM but I figured since others were throwing their hat into the ring here it'd be fair to do so here.
I am interested, and would love to join another game run by you birch.
Do you think they need more arcane power or are they more in need of a skill based character?
I haven't asked them - and probably won't. Either would add to the party under the circumstances.
Will you be allowing the ACG playtest classes?
Unfortunately not - as ever, I like to keep things relatively simple, so my standard rules apply. I can be persuaded from time to time but it is always by exception.
I don't know if joining another PBP would be the wisest thing I've done, but I do have a COCT-ready character -- in my aliases, Callie Cobalt, an arcane duelist bard. I was in a COCT campaign with her where the GM had to move and then didn't have time/interest to restart the game. We only got as far as finishing the fishery and moving into the next day.
If she looks like she'd be suitable for your game, let me know. I am also happy to bow out given it looks like there is other interest as well.
Sorry, I know this isn't a PM but I figured since others were throwing their hat into the ring here it'd be fair to do so here.
Don't worry that it's not a PM. The character looks good to me and you'd be picking up where Callie left off.
I'll keep options open for a few more days before committing to any characters.
Gaah. That is a tempting offer. I don't know that I should add another game though as it is getting into my busy season. I'll have to think about it. Besides, there seems to be some interest among my other colleagues. ;)
I may have one spot in the Council of Thieves too. What is it about me as a GM?
Birch, I think you're a fine GM. If you legit want some feedback, I'd say sometimes you miss a post or action and then things get confused, but that happens in PBP.
For us and I think one of your other games it started and then went into the holidays and that can cause some slowness. One thing I noticed reading your COCT thread is you waited a very long time for a delinquent player to post and then others got frustrated waiting. If I were to suggest anything, it would be to establish a policy like if someone does not post within a certain period of time, that you bot them. This especially goes double for combats -- nothing kills a PBP faster than someone disappearing in the middle of a combat and then everyone is just waiting.
It is always hard to balance between giving people leeway to roleplay and pushing things along. I would suggest always erring on pushing things along, and if you're not sure, post in the discussion thread that you're watching but wanting to give time for roleplay to play out. Since your requirement is for us to post roughly once a day, you should also be posting once a day--don't worry about "interrupting."
I think you do a good job of sharing info, running things, adjudication -- you're a good GM and should not feel discouraged.
Many times in PBPs there are people who are just slackers, and you just can't help that. Some people just disappear rather than have the basic courtesy of saying they are busy or are disinterested, or maybe they have computer issues but don't seem to have the common sense to borrow a friend's phone or computer to send a quick message explaining the situation. It's worst when the GM is the one who disappears without a word, and that's happened to me several times. So thank you for sticking with things and keeping us going.
Was it something I said?
He doesn't post on Weekends usually, right? :)
Weekends are usually slow for everyone. Hopefully it will pick up soon. (Though the weekend's already over for me, damnit!)
Birch, I think you're a fine GM. If you legit want some feedback, I'd say sometimes you miss a post or action and then things get confused, but that happens in PBP.
For us and I think one of your other games it started and then went into the holidays and that can cause some slowness. One thing I noticed reading your COCT thread is you waited a very long time for a delinquent player to post and then others got frustrated waiting. If I were to suggest anything, it would be to establish a policy like if someone does not post within a certain period of time, that you bot them. This especially goes double for combats -- nothing kills a PBP faster than someone disappearing in the middle of a combat and then everyone is just waiting.
It is always hard to balance between giving people leeway to roleplay and pushing things along. I would suggest always erring on pushing things along, and if you're not sure, post in the discussion thread that you're watching but wanting to give time for roleplay to play out. Since your requirement is for us to post roughly once a day, you should also be posting once a day--don't worry about "interrupting."
I think you do a good job of sharing info, running things, adjudication -- you're a good GM and should not feel discouraged.
Many times in PBPs there are people who are just slackers, and you just can't help that. Some people just disappear rather than have the basic courtesy of saying they are busy or are disinterested, or maybe they have computer issues but don't seem to have the common sense to borrow a friend's phone or computer to send a quick message explaining the situation. It's worst when the GM is the one who disappears without a word, and that's happened to me several times. So thank you for sticking with things and keeping us going.
Thanks for this. I've now posted a message in every game I GM to let players know I'll move things along if anyone appears to be holding things up.
As an aside, we need to move this game along. Do you want to ask Ameiko questions or do you want to escort her to the Sheriff? And if the latter, are you all going or just some of you.
Horatio just wants to get Ameiko somewhere safe. Whether that's with the guard, or back at the Rusty Dragon, or somewhere else entirely is up to her. No real questioning, other than to make sure she's okay - she's had a rough day!
She was last described as "out of it" so I wasn't planning to ask her anything.
I'm fine with Horatio and Merwyn (along with Ameiko) fetching the sheriff while the rest of us wait with brother.
I trust the sherrif's post made sense. In terms of resting up etc. - please take this opportunity to level up!
Interestingly you haven't bagged a lot of loot to date. That's fine - as you'll get plenty of opportunity over the coming posts...
Just let me know here when you're ready to continue.
*Insert obligatory cool level up pose here*
Veryl has reached level 2.
HP: +12/2 = +6
BAB: +1
Fortitude: +1
Favored Class Bonus: Skill Point
Veryl Learned:
Deceptive Strike
Veryl Gained:
Weapon Focus Feat
Skill Increases:
intimidate+1
Acrobatics+1
Stealth+1
Sense Motive+1
Craft(Weapons)+1
Knowledge(Engineering)+1
Since we have sometime to rest is it okay for Veryl to engage in some item crafting?
Yay! Kalig gains 4+2 HP, +1 BAB, +1 Fort and Will.
She gets 5+1 favored class skill points, spent in knowledge (nobility), knowledge (history), spellcraft, heal, perception, and survival. She gained the Lorekeeper ability which gives her diplomacy and knowledge nobility, local, and history as class skills and she gets an additional +2 to them.
(Nobility because Kalig's picking up on that the Kaijitsu family is important and she is going to start asking around about them and other important families of sandpoint.)
Since we have sometime to rest is it okay for Veryl to engage in some item crafting?
You suspect the sheriff meant hours, not days. If that works for you, please craft.
Oh doubt I can make something in hours, oh one more question when you said half the max hp did you mean the hit die or the calculated max hp at level 1?
Updated for level 2. Can't wait a few more levels when Miro will be practically leaving enemies naked in combat.
Done! :)
Breaca gains +1 BaB, Fort, & Reflex; Combat style Archery (Rapid Shot); 7 skill points increasing Acrobatics, Climb, Intimidate, Perception, Ride, Stealth, & Survival; favored class bonus to hit points -> 5 +2Con +1 FC = 8 hps.
Oh doubt I can make something in hours, oh one more question when you said half the max hp did you mean the hit die or the calculated max hp at level 1?
I presumed he meant the way NPCs level... you go up the "average" so for example a fighter will at level 2 gain 5 HP, then at level 3 gain 6, then 5, 6, 5, 6 and so on.
If I am wrong I will need to adjust.
I took it the same way Kalig did, but Birch can confirm that's correct.
I assumed it was PFS style - so a d12 hit dice is 7 hit points; d10 is 6; d8 is 5; d6 is 4. Again, though. I'm hoping Birch will correct me if I'm wrong. =)
SO! Horatio gains:
- 6 hp (1/2 hit dice [d8] +1 [CON])
- +1 BAB, CMB, CMD
- Versatile performance: Perform (string instruments) (substitutes perform [strings] bonus for bluff and diplomacy checks - have reallocated 2 skill points, as approved)
- New spells: (see below)
- One more 1st-level spell per day
- 2 additional rounds of bardic performance (total 10 rounds/day)
- Well-versed - +4 bonus on saving throws vs. bardic performance, sonic, and language-dependant effects.
- 10 (count 'em!) skill points: spent on Perform (strings), sense motive, intimidate (x2), acrobatics, knowledge (dungeoneering), linguistics, stealth, perception, and spellcraft. The two points previously spent on bluff and diplomacy have been shifted over to perform (sing) and knowledge (local).
- New language (from linguistics): Goblin
So, people, I'm in need of a new 1st-level spell. I don't want to step on our illusionist's toes too much (three feats seem to point to that specialization!), so I reckon I'll play up the charismatic bastard angle and stick to mainly enchantments.
New cantrip is summon instrument (never know when it'll come in handy), and for my 1st-level spell, I'm tossing up between the following: adoration, lesser confusion, delusional pride, and sleep. Help a bard out? ;-)
@Kalig I guess we'll both have to wait for a reply, but still thanks for the help.
@Horato I say go with sleep, or if you are wiling to pick something besides the ones you mentioned grease is always a good spell to have.
D'oh! How could I forget grease? The spell that gave my party merry hell in my kobold den... >.>
I realised on my opening post on the recruitment thread I said. "Max starting HP, thereafter average (max HP/2 rounded up)."
Except you can't round up half half an even die! What I meant was average HP rounded up.
e.g. A fighter has 1d10. The average is not 5 (10/2) but 5.5. Why? Because the possible outcomes are 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10. So the true average is 55/10 = 5.5. Which rounds up to 6.
So for a fighter I would suggest it's 6HP every level up - plus any favoured class/feat bonuses.
Sorry for the confusion.
I'll let your posts in the game thread run for a short while - but if you want a specific response, please initiate something e.g. the conversation with Ameiko.
Recruitment update
CotCT - They have an alchemist, a cleric and a ranger and are really missing a front-line character
CoT - They have a sorceror, a rogue, an oracle and a summoner and are really missing a front-line character.
I need to add one to the CoT campaign for this reason. Posting has picked up of late and once their current battle is over, they'll level to L2. They've covered the AP to the same point as yours, but done far less role-playing to get there.
I would add one or two characters to the CotCT campaign. They started fast, slowed right down and again have picked up again. Again, they're about to level up.
So...please make your pitch for which game and which character. I know you've already mentioned it once, but you may not still be interested and I want to make a decision before the week-end. The characters will be L2 (standard L2 gold to spend) and the standard character creation rules (including the HP formula mentioned above!).
Thanks for clearing that up Birch.
I've got a big post in mind but posting on this mobile phone while on lunch break is a pain so I'll hopefully make that post a couple of hours from now.
Sorry Birch, but if you glance at my campaign tab you'll see I'm fairly overloaded as it is. It would take a very interesting game for me to join another.
Will do the level up soon. Probably around level 3, I will diversify a bit, as I might very well become useless if we ever face a mind-affecting-immune enemy. :P
Shadow spells seem pretty nifty.
Cool, Kalig gets 1 more HP then. Never going to argue with that!
Horatio, I'd agree with grease too. I'm not a fan of sleep it's only ever useful for low HD creatures which most games seem to run out of in too short order--although you could take it to deal with the goblins we seem to be facing a lot of, then retrain at 4th.
Recruitment update
CotCT - They have an alchemist, a cleric and a ranger and are really missing a front-line character
CoT - They have a sorceror, a rogue, an oracle and a summoner and are really missing a front-line character.
I need to add one to the CoT campaign for this reason. Posting has picked up of late and once their current battle is over, they'll level to L2. They've covered the AP to the same point as yours, but done far less role-playing to get there.
I would add one or two characters to the CotCT campaign. They started fast, slowed right down and again have picked up again. Again, they're about to level up.
So...please make your pitch for which game and which character. I know you've already mentioned it once, but you may not still be interested and I want to make a decision before the week-end. The characters will be L2 (standard L2 gold to spend) and the standard character creation rules (including the HP formula mentioned above!).
I am still offering up Callie for CotCT (This is Kalig/DeathQuaker). I admit she's not best for fully front line, but I was pushing her in a strong melee direction and could even rejigger her build if needed to strengthen that, if possible. I'd want to rejigger her build a little anyway. We'd have to figure out where she comes in and what she knows and doesn't know--I am assuming she probably did not go to the fishery but perhaps ran into the party on her own hunt for allies to take down Lamm? (if she is taken, just remind me to remove Queen Ileosa's brooch from her inventory ;) ). Could she keep the Harrow card pulled for her earlier? It was pretty cool/appropriate for her. (The Survivor)
If you go with a different character I understand--probably better to get a proper frontliner in there.
Oh, and regarding treasure divvying:
My 2 cents:
Potion of CLW: I'd say to Breaca or Horatio.
Shortbow -- to whoever is proficient and does ranged stuff
ROP+1 -- To Merwyn, she will have less access to AC boosters
Thieves tools -- to Miro
MW Flute -- to Horatio or if he doesn't want it, to whomever does or sell it
Everything else: sell for its value (if we had a cleric, the silver dust should go to them, as it's a spell component) and use to buy some extra low level potions or alchemical gear, split the remainder evenly. Although Kalig perhaps secretly wants the earrings. :) That's 465 GP total value if I did the math right (which is worth rechecking).
Not trying to be bossy, just wanting to share thoughts to help push along, as treasure divvying can drag sometimes. :)
Nice work Kalig, always appreciate a fellow loot-cruncher. I'll do the math when I have a minute of free time, but so far I agree with everything you say, well done!
Looks like I'm taking grease as my new 1st-level spell. Regarding loot, why not, I'll take the flute. Thanks for doing that, Kalig! Really speeds things along. =)
The division of the loot if my math is still good would be 77.5 gp per person. If Kalig keeps the earrings, that's 52.5 gp for her. (That was sweet, Veryl. :) )
I am glad you liked the scene, but I think since Veryl was the one who picked the earring out he should take the lower cut of the gold.
I was a bit busy today. I'll have my character leveled up over the weekend.
I am glad you liked the scene, but I think since Veryl was the one who picked the earring out he should take the lower cut of the gold.
I appreciate the generosity but... I don't want to get into an argument over this, but it is essentially part of my share (meta-wise/OOC) of the wealth.
Besides, Veryl walked away telling the rest of the party to divvy everything up and to just hand him his share later, so he isn't there to insist on a higher or lower cut. :)
==
And to everyone:
Are there any items we want to buy together, or shall we just spend our share on whatever we like? I may get some oil of magic weapon if that is easily accessible.
I am glad you liked the scene, but I think since Veryl was the one who picked the earring out he should take the lower cut of the gold.I appreciate the generosity but... I don't want to get into an argument over this, but it is essentially part of my share (meta-wise/OOC) of the wealth.
Besides, Veryl walked away telling the rest of the party to divvy everything up and to just hand him his share later, so he isn't there to insist on a higher or lower cut. :)
Okay, I don't see why you thought we'd argue about it though. I don't mean anything by that, its just I was surprised when you mentioned arguing over this.
I meant I wanted to pre-empt getting into a back-and-forth of "I'll take the lower share," "no I'll take the lower share!" "No I will!" If you're cool, then clearly there will be no argument.
A slight change of approach.
I’m playing in a campaign on these boards and we’ve just finished the first adventure path. It’s taken us just over 400 posts and we’re at level three already.
It came as a surprise (a pleasant one I might add) and it made me wonder about the pace of my own games. As you know, I love the role-playing and would never speed that up. But simplifying combat seems sensible (without taking away the challenge). On reflection, what we did that really made things quicker was the lack of searching individual rooms – and rolls every room to see if we spotted stuff.
And that’s what I propose as a way forward. What does it mean in real terms? Firstly you would level up quicker. Are you OK with that? Secondly, expect fewer but tougher fights. Again, are you OK with that? I will moderate to ensure no TPKs but won’t eliminate the prospect of a character dying. Next, expect to be told what’s in rooms and not to explore every drawer and chest. You’ll still have to let me know about sensing motives etc. but I expect to do away with the searching of six rooms in every house, just to let you know there’s nothing in them.
Finally, this is a proposal. The game is underway and I don’t want to enforce any of this. Please let me know what you think (even if you’re ambivalent) so I can make an informed decision.
I think it's fine as long as we don't lose a sense of ambience. Assuming that we give anywhere at least a cursory search before continuing works.
I've learned in my tabletop games being clear when there is nothing of interest is of great help.
I highly approve of this. One of the best and simplest ways I've found to speed up games is to make mass rolls for the players. Like instead of saying "You enter the room, everybody make a perception" just say "You enter the room, the rogue and the barbarian notice a trap on the far wall" since you just rolled every bodies perception.
I think it's fine as long as we don't lose a sense of ambience. Assuming that we give anywhere at least a cursory search before continuing works.
I've learned in my tabletop games being clear when there is nothing of interest is of great help.
Agreed. And to echol what Miro says, the aim would be to reduce the number of rolls in dealing with inanimate objects (and avoid waiting for the same).
I meant I wanted to pre-empt getting into a back-and-forth of "I'll take the lower share," "no I'll take the lower share!" "No I will!" If you're cool, then clearly there will be no argument.
Understood...even though I had my "no I'll take the lower share!" reply ready ;) I kid, I kid.
@Birch I'll be honest Birch, I love to rp, its why this group is counted among my favorites, but I also love my combat and having less combat encounters even if they are still challenging means less fun for me, so I'll have to say that I am against this particular proposal.
@Birch I'll be honest Birch, I love to rp, its why this group is counted among my favorites, but I also love my combat and having less combat encounters even if they are still challenging means less fun for me, so I'll have to say that I am against this particular proposal.
Which is why it's a proposal, not an automatic change.
To further develop my understanding of your thoughts, I know fewer encounters is something you wouldn't vote for. What about the same number of encounters but tougher, albeit fewer, foes i.e. 2 goblin commandos vs. 4 goblins (I haven't done the maths, but you get the idea)? The same challenge but less work to keep track of the available targets.
@Birch I'll be honest Birch, I love to rp, its why this group is counted among my favorites, but I also love my combat and having less combat encounters even if they are still challenging means less fun for me, so I'll have to say that I am against this particular proposal.Which is why it's a proposal, not an automatic change.
To further develop my understanding of your thoughts, I know fewer encounters is something you wouldn't vote for. What about the same number of encounters but tougher, albeit fewer, foes i.e. 2 goblin commandos vs. 4 goblins (I haven't done the maths, but you get the idea)? The same challenge but less work to keep track of the available targets.
I'd be completely fine with that.
@Birch I'll be honest Birch, I love to rp, its why this group is counted among my favorites, but I also love my combat and having less combat encounters even if they are still challenging means less fun for me, so I'll have to say that I am against this particular proposal.Which is why it's a proposal, not an automatic change.
To further develop my understanding of your thoughts, I know fewer encounters is something you wouldn't vote for. What about the same number of encounters but tougher, albeit fewer, foes i.e. 2 goblin commandos vs. 4 goblins (I haven't done the maths, but you get the idea)? The same challenge but less work to keep track of the available targets.
I am of mixed feelings on this.
Veryl, I dig the enjoyment of combat--and I would say where my concern would be would be to ensure the maintenance of excitement, which doesn't have to always mean an attack (but could).
However, nothing slows PBPs down faster than combat. Nothing. Even the best managed ones will at some point have everybody waiting for someone to post before it can ultimately be resolved. Almost every premature-death PBP I was in either died during a combat, or just after a combat that went painfully slowly (as players started to slowly give up/lose interest during). And slow, text based combat can get very boring to me too.
So the original proposal to me sounded better. (But, keep going.)
The problem with the "tougher, but fewer numbers" -- is I have trouble thinking it will really help. My experience as a GM is that while yes, you have fewer creatures to track, the fact is, usually a larger number of creatures is the better challenge. With 1-2 creatures in combat, the party always has the extreme advantage because if you think of them as a unit versus an enemy unit, the "PC Unit" gets WAY more attacks per round. This is best seen in the commonly experienced "failed big bad fight" where the GM puts forward a very high CR single bad guy, and the lower level party still creams him in a couple rounds because the big bad still only gets one standard or full action to the typical party's 4-6. And the GM feels like he or she failed at presenting a proper challenge. (The exceptions are where the big bad has such a high AC or saves they are impossible to hit, and then that just becomes a slog.)
And the fact is, one of the benefits of PBP is the GM has more time to track creatures. It's still hard to track a larger number of creatures, but at a once-a-day or so post req, the GM has time to really review his creatures and the map before posting so tracking should at least theoretically be less stressful.
Now, the "tougher, but fewer numbers" will make combats go faster because there are fewer creatures to kill. If the point is to just make things go faster--which I realize is really the key issue--sure, it'll work--but what I'm getting at is you might be making fights easier (even if the numbers don't necessarily indicate that), not just faster. And that should be borne in mind.
My suggested compromise would be more of a trying to play things fast-and-loose.... run the biggest, most challenging encounters as full on combats with all the die rolling required... but maybe run "speed bump" encounters extant to add flavor a little more freeform... no rounds or initiative or AOOs, everyone gets roughly a standard action, and assume low level "mook" creatures die in a couple hits. And/or also really play up creative solutions to combats or avoiding combats -- for example, Veryl's kicking at the door to knock out Tsuto. That was an "avoided combat" but it was colorful, creative, and let our party fighter shine -- and also quick.
This would be hard to plan for and arbitrate, however.
Ultimately, I will note I'll go along with whatever is decided--I'm not going to block the route one way or another. Just my thoughts on the matter. And truly ultimately, Birch needs to do what is most comfortable and interesting for him as a GM. He's got to be able to have fun with this and feel like he can handle whatever is tried, or there's no point. If the GM isn't having fun, no one else will.