Depending on how things go I could see characters crossing from one task to another at any time. You could have any number of things going on if you think about it,nothing says we might end up with 3 or more small groups instead of one or two larger ones.
I wish I'd waited to see what people posted before I made up a character. I could have made a divine and improved my chances of getting picked.
I did consider an Inquisitor, but only core classes are allowed.
I quite like the idea of option 1 and 2, so either's a great idea. Two campaigns although fun for us, would really suck for you, so if I had to choose one in particular, I think the 1st option would be best, though if you went with two rival groups, they could build a Kingdom each, with the possibility of diplomatic trade and help sought from one another to beat the campaign and go to the (I'm guessing) eventual war together, if such a thing happens towards the end.
I like option one, though it might complicate things on paizo's message boards.
Option 1 has some real advantages - more chances to role play with people, the chance to tailor teams for specific missions for greater success, etc. I know its more work for you, Mr. DM, but in the end I think less work than two games. And you have ready backup. If a few people drop, the bench is still deep and drop outs will impact us less.
I don't like option 2. PvP, even indirect PvP, can get pretty nasty. And I seldom loose, so that means I loose friends. lol
I will help any way I can, from loot tracking, to helping with maps, to posting regularly. You ask for it, you got it.
I like the first option; Kingmaker is a pretty good campaign for a larger group, though it might get crazy with so many characters fighting one battle. However, do whatever is best for you. There is no need to overwork yourself.
With 29 applicants, many of which are absolutely fantastic, I'm having a hard time deciding how to do this. I'm trying to figure out just how feasible it is to try and run two groups through this, not as two different campaigns, but as a team of adventurers. The mechanics makes sense, as not all mercenary companies or adventuring groups are limited to 4-6 members. Pathfinders, Aspis, Harpers (yea, Forgotten Realms, sue me), etc. are all groups that are far beyond the standard small size. So in my head it is possible. And with 14 positions within the kingdom, there is room for everyone, but only one (or two via romance) ruler.
Where I'm stumbling is figuring out the logistics of running two groups. I'm giving it thought, as to try and include as many of these great applicants as possible. Here are some thoughts:
- Games run as "scenarios" for a group. All chosen members of the "adventuring company" have a home thread. When it comes time to head out and explore/solve a problem/make contacts/etc. a group is chosen from the 12 members. That becomes "group A". The remaining party is group B and they work on another assignment/issue. At the end, the two groups meet back up and pool resources, sell, mingle, so on, until the next assignment/task. When kingdom management comes around, all players participate. This method would allow it so that all 12 players would intermingle with each other, groups wouldn't be static, and everyone would play with everyone else at some point. Diplomatic mission? Send the diplomacy experts. Dungeon crawl? Send those best suited for it. Covert mission? Send the stealthy folks. This concept has me really thinking. This type of game would be far more custom and sandbox like. I'd have a lot of extra work to do.
- Group A are the "good guys" and group B are the "bad guys". No direct conflict happens between the parties, but they stir trouble for each other and try to undermine the progress of each other through influence of native folk in the River Kingdoms, trade route sabotage,...
Wow, you don't believe in doing things small, do you?
For obvious reasons, both sound like they could be either really fun, or blow up in our collective faces.
Let's do it! I'm game for either.
Option one sounds absolutely fantastic. It has lot of potential to go south, what with the logistics of twelve players, even though they are only indirectly involved with each other, but if it works out this might well become one of the coolest things I've seen.
Mark my vote for option one, it sounds like a blast.
I'd rather not have player-to-player competition, but I'll go with whatever the people decide. I'm not picky.
|
I like the idea of running a big group that splits up into smaller groups by assignment, that was the first thing I thought of too when we started talking about a big group. I think it works well, allows only one kingdom to manage at once and allows people to change up who their playing with a bit depending on the mission.
|
I didn't get put on Will Thatcher's list but I am very interested! I love this character and can't wait to try him out, I have never played a druid before.
Sorry, saw you said dotting for interest, didn't know you had a character set up for it. Sorry about that.
On the campaign idea, I think option 1 is definitely the best of the 3. Option 2, while interesting, would be difficult to do without ending up in a PvP scenario, as the good PC's track down the ones causing mischief.
On the name, I was trying to think of a common, mundane last name for a Will, and Thatcher sounded familiar, but I couldn't place where.
Since our applications have dwindled, and I think most that wanted to apply have done so, I've completed the process of selecting the applicants I feel will be the best fit for the game. As I have not yet decided if I will run one or two groups, I'm looking at determining the top twelve applicants first. Most of you made this a very tough task for me. While I realize I did say that I would keep applications open till Monday/Tuesday, I'm impatient to a fault and I also feel if you really wanted to get a chance to play you would have jumped on the chance to apply. So initiative favors you all. :)
A little bit about how I am choosing, so everyone understands the reasons behind getting picked or not getting picked. First, I'm a number cruncher, so the obvious way for me to do this was to grade submissions on a scale of 1-10 in multiple categories, add the results up, and arrange from high to low.
My categories for selection, and some explanation:
- Background: Did it wow me? Was it longer than a few lines of text? Did you somehow work it in to the campaign by actually taking the time to do some research and look at the source material available? Did you put shiny little things like names, places, and family for me to build off of for later encounters and spin-off ideas? If so, you scored high here. Background to me says you are interested in the character, not just a block of stats. It says you have invested enough time to think like your character would, to come up with a story, and to bring it to life. All very important for PbP, which is all about writing.
- Build: Is the character survivable? Last thing I want is to replace characters every few weeks. This is just a general rating on the character based on my own gut instinct. If you dropped your CON below a 10 you probably got a mulligan here unless it was very strongly tied to your background.
- Non-Twink: I know, a funny category. But I'm not a huge fan of the min/max, as I had stated. If you managed to create a character without dipping into a stat for bonus points to get that 18 in STR, you got some points here. With 25 point buy there should have been no reason for someone to have an 8 in a stat. Doing so lost you some points here. Multiple 8's would really hurt you. Also, did you go for the cheese feats early on, or did you do something interesting? While some people scored low here, other areas pulled them out of the gutter.
- Posting: Here I gave points based on your history on these boards. This number was mainly influenced by total post count, with some changes based on what you actually posted. Are you an active GM? Bonus points, because I feel GMs deserve to get to play too. If you are sitting over 2000 posts and are a GM you pretty much cleaned up in this category. I did also give points here for activity in the thread. If you posted a character and I never heard from you again, not so much.
- Negative Marks: Was there something about your character, posting habits, general attitude on the forums, or previous posts/campaigns that led me to get a "hunch" that we might not be a good mix? Not a required value, but some did earn some points here. And just so everyone knows, I probably spent the better part of 30 minutes per character just looking at your previous posts on the boards elsewhere. It tells you a lot about an applicant.
- Positive Marks: Catch all category for anything else intangible or unclassified. Were you the only wizard to apply? Did you have a good attitude on the boards? Does the party REALLY need that cleric? In your previous campaigns, did you actually role play well? Things like this earned bonus points which dropped into here.
Having said that, and having given away my secrets, applications are now closed.
For those of you that I did not select, please don't take it the wrong way. All of you would make great players at any table, but when the field contains this many applications, someone is going to have to be the odd man out unfortunately. Were that I could pick you all, and run 6 different Kingmaker campaigns, I would. But even the GM needs a life!
Also, I will keep all applications saved. If we lose someone, you could be next on the list, and you will hear from me to come in as a replacement if you wish. So keep that in mind as well.
Without further ado, I present the top 12 applicants. I will be contacting each of you within the next day or two to explain where we go from here. At this point nothing is locked in. I don't know how I am going to decide to run this yet, and feedback will be important. If you are one of the twelve and vanish off the face of the earth, you will be quickly replaced by the next in line.
Dendarial - Elven Ranger
Rufus Fitzroi - Cavalier (Standard Bearer)
Castor Antares - Half-Elf Cleric of Desna
Brom Wolven - Human Barbarian (Scarred Rager)
Lelouch Vi Orlovsky - Human Cleric
Sir Karse - Half-Orc Paladin (Shining Knight)
Theod Garess - Human Ranger (Infiltrator, Dungeon Rover)
Winifred Lebeda - Human Sorcerer
Tshilaba Vadoma - Elf Wizard
Hadin Cassoren - Human Paladin
Kurgan Grimtooth - Half-Orc Rogue
Cappi Brightonspinner - Halfling Rogue (Filcher/Knife Master)
The funniest thing about this is, I didn't pick this based on class at all, with the exception of a few bonus points to the arcane and divine casters, yet this selection almost perfectly balances out into two standard parties. Pretty nutty honestly.
For those selected, please check in to the discussion thread to acknowledge you have read this. We will go from there.
Thank you so much to everyone that applied. It was a pleasure meeting each of your characters in my own way.
Not picked :(
Oh well, maybe next time!
Have fun you guys that got picked.
That makes strike two. I shall have to clean up Keldrianne for the next one.
Oh well. You guys have fun ;)
To our wonderful DM: Thank you!
To my fellow group members: Congratulation, and I look forward to adventuring with you.
To those who weren't picked: I wish you the best of successes on future campaigns. Sorry to hear you weren't picked despite starting the original thread, Keldrianne.
Congrats to everyone who got in, and good luck on the journey. This campaign looks like it will be a lot of fun, so I hope the Top 12 enjoy it.
Woo Hoo! I made it!
Everyone who didn't, just so you know, the character I submitted has gone through about five different applications. Every different application I have tweaked & honed something about the character. Don't look at this as a failure, look at this as an opportunity to make your character that much better & stronger & more fun for you to play & for others to play with.
Okay, I'm done now.
And none of the bards made it? Wow, guess it didn't matter how many there were. :)
I just wish I knew what I lacked so I know for next time.
Good Luck!
And none of the bards made it? Wow, guess it didn't matter how many there were. :)
I just wish I knew what I lacked so I know for next time.
Good Luck!
You might consider asking the good Captain for/in a PM what things you might have done differently.
Glad to be part of the team.
Good luck to everyone who was unfortunatly not picked this time. I guess for most of us, if not all of us, it's not the first application.
You might consider asking the good Captain for/in a PM what things you might have done differently.And none of the bards made it? Wow, guess it didn't matter how many there were. :)
I just wish I knew what I lacked so I know for next time.
Good Luck!
I implied that, I thought, but I have a feeling running a game with 12 PCs will keep him too busy for a response. I'll just wait for another campaign and try again. Again, Good Luck!
|
|
Congratz and good luck to everyone who made it in, I might try to keep my eye on this thread since it may be fairly informative about how a big game like this will operate.
I know what I did wrong, should have gone for something more conventional for this game, but I've had the idea for Anais for a while and wanted to get it written down somewhere, now I can just come back here if I get the chance to use it for something else.