Kingmaker: A Brave New World

Game Master GunMetalDrac

Alayi, for your perusal:
One
Two
Three
Four
Five

I came across a LOT more nudity than I was expecting during that search. And, as with the case with most fantasy art, there's not a whole lot of functionality in clothing...

-Posted with Wayfinder

I would point out that the AP doesn't assume the PC's will head directly for the Bandit Camp first. A methodical team could well be second level or so by the time they encounter them. I know, because the only actual Table game I've played Kingmaker in we did just that, & we still had an almost TPK.

Granted, that had as much to do with bad luck/inexperience as anything else. The only PC to succeed at the Perception check to spot the Camp had never played an RPG before & was not yet ten, so he didn't realize hailing the bandits we were out hunting was a bad idea...

edit: There is also the simple fact that we can't really handle taking all of these bandits prisoner. With four of us, we can probably manage to contain two at most. Yes, we could 'force-march' all of them back to the Trading Post, but that just postpones the problem because I can all but guarantee that neither the Levetons nor the guard force are going to agree to holding them as prisoners while we go off exploring the countryside. Best case scenario they smile & nod & wait until we are out of sight, then string them up.

Ouch. That must have been both hilarious & brutal to witness. Talk about getting an RPG baptism by fire :)

About what kind of assumptions the AP makes, I'd suspect it'd be flat-out bad design if there were no contingencies planned for groups who (like us) prioritized neutralizing the nearest threat before going out exploring. This is strictly OOC thinking, of course, but consider this: one thing is having Kressle getting suspicious because Happs has not yet returned, another thing entirely is catching them unsuspecting and by surprise. This is likely what Happs was hinting at when he said that the number of bandits at the camp at any given moment is fluctuating wildly.

Even then, the more of them there are, the more important I think it might get to pounce upon them when they're clueless & clumped up (especially now that you're two (wo)men short). Regarding the grim scenario you depicted, that's certainly the most likely outcome - but in the meantime, all I'm asking is a chance to see how things stand with this Ser Garess. I know our GM isn't a big fan of strong-arming your way through Diplomacy (and rightly so) - but technically it'd be just DC 20 + CHA to get the guards from indifferent to helpful, and then a DC 15 + CHA at most to persuade them to do Xelani a favor. If one the other hand it's role-playing he wants, I'll gladly provide that (really, I don't think that now that there's a contingent stationed here this would be as far-fetched a request as it was before).

After all, this isn't Restov. According to our charter, we're the law here.

Let it be clear: I'm not asking for you to take unnecessary risks in order to capture them alive. All the contrary: I'm just telling that using Color Spray again, should a favorable occasion present itself, might not be an option to just rule out a priori.

I'm not sure about your numbers there, Rufus. A 2:1 guard:prisoner ratio is beyond extreme. Even Alcatraz ran with 1:3, and historically, 1:12 was commonplace.

That said, I agree that we shouldn't be taking prisoners. Taking Kressle alive is a good plan, get some information about the Stag Lord. The rest of the mooks, though, we don't need.

I will avoid posting the knowledge I have about the bandit camp encounter, though I will note that it isn't set in stone; it will change. Sounds like your previous group may have had a more difficult scenario. Of course, it sounds like one major mistake exacerbated things a bit...

I'm not sure about your numbers there, Rufus. A 2:1 guard:prisoner ratio is beyond extreme. Even Alcatraz ran with 1:3, and historically, 1:12 was commonplace.

First off, Alcatraz was a prison, the Trading Post is not. Neither the Levetons, nor the guards signed on to be prison guards. Second, as a prison, Alcatraz was set up to hold prisoners. All the environmental factors were in the guards favor. Finally, the numbers I was quoting are in reference to us hauling prisoners back, through an environment the prisoners are more familiar with than we are, when we really aren't 'speced out' to transport prisoners. We have no manacles, we have no one particularly trained in proper rope techniques for mobile incarceration, nothing that would even remotely make taking them back alive 'en mas' a good idea.

Which leads into my/Rufus 'problem' with Color Spray, at least as the 'go to'. Sure, it takes them out. This time we don't have time/circumstances in our favor to simply tie them up & take them with us. Color Spray will likely be necessary, to control their numbers so that we can fight them on a more even field as it were, but if we try & pull the exact same trick we pulled at the Trading Post, it will either blow up in our faces, or we will have to kill them in cold blood. I don't believe any of us signed on for that.

edit: If Arawn wants to try Charming Happs, Rufus isn't going to stop him. He just isn't in favor of it & doubts it's the 'magic bullet' Arawn seems to.

As stated, Alcatraz was the extreme, put forth as an example only. The point being, we don't need to outnumber prisoners 2:1 in order to effectively guard them.

And yeah, we should be executing them. They're not surrendering and begging for quarter. We're bringing them down on our own power. The only real reason to keep them alive is to question them, and we only need Kressle for that. Of course, justifying a Coup De Grace in combat is easier than doing so after the fact.

And Arawn isn't going to act unilaterally when the majority of the party opposes the use of Charm. He respects Castor and Korinne too much to go against a 2-1 vote. And please do not put words in my character's mouth. Arawn isn't suggesting that Charm is a fix to all of our problems, simply that it is a tool in our possession that isn't being utilized.

The funny thing is, Arawn wasn't even in favor of taking prisoners. So why am I writing this? Because I feel that, after two whole weeks of stalling the game through over-analyzing things, we didn't even manage to get some facts straight.

First off, Alcatraz was a prison, the Trading Post is not.

The trading post has a couple of lockable rooms and some rope to tie their hands up. That should just suffice. Only by modern, civilized countries standards that would be considered laughable; more of this below.

Neither the Levetons, nor the guards signed on to be prison guards.

That's why I'm asking. If they refuse, at least it'll be the GM telling me that. For the record, I intend to have them put to work, fixing the trade post, perhaps doing a little bit of farming once the ground thaws - that sort of things. I've also asked the GM if long-term mellowing of their disposition towards us would be doable, he said there was no harm in trying.

Second, as a prison, Alcatraz was set up to hold prisoners. All the environmental factors were in the guards favor.

The way Pathfinder mechanics work, 5 armored guards vs. a bunch of unarmed (and potentially tied up) prisoners have the odds stacked in the formers' favor far beyond any modern prison's wildest dream. With watches being set up and doors being locked, there's no way they can break out without being noticed - and put down hard.

Finally, the numbers I was quoting are in reference to us hauling prisoners back, through an environment the prisoners are more familiar with than we are, when we really aren't 'speced out' to transport prisoners. We have no manacles, we have no one particularly trained in proper rope techniques for mobile incarceration, nothing that would even remotely make taking them back alive 'en mas' a good idea.

It's just a matter of posting something along the lines of: We bind their hands and then one bandit to another, eventually creating a chain of prisoners tied to one of our saddles as we ride towards Oleg's. There. Done. That's how prisoners / slaves have been carried from one place to another throughout all history. And by the way, ratios were nowhere near 1:1 or 1:2. More like 1:20 in such instances.

Which leads into my/Rufus 'problem' with Color Spray, at least as the 'go to'. Sure, it takes them out. This time we don't have time/circumstances in our favor to simply tie them up & take them with us. Color Spray will likely be necessary, to control their numbers so that we can fight them on a more even field as it were, but if we try & pull the exact same trick we pulled at the Trading Post, it will either blow up in our faces, or we will have to kill them in cold blood. I don't believe any of us signed on for that.

Well, that's not for you to decide, I'm afraid. At the very worst, as you pointed out, it will thin their number; perhaps even substantially. By the way, you were displaying a similar attitude back at Oleg's, chuckling and being sarcastic just as Arawn's plan was perfectly falling into place around you. Every time I tried asking you both IC and OOC why our behavior was filling you with amusement, you never replied directly, just vaguely depicting grim scenarios if things weren't done the way you wanted. Then, this happened

With everyone working together, the bandits are quickly pulled away from the horses, disarmed and tied up. Some do seem to groggily move about as the last knot is being tied but they are disarmed, little comes of it.

Now we're still waiting for a plan to come together, when you've never actually given one single good reason for the infiltration/Color Spray plan not to work (other than unilaterally declaring Happs' information as not completely trustworthy, and also unilaterally deciding that a 1:1 or even 2:1 armed PC:unarmed prisoners ratio is unmanageable).

Then again, do as you wish. Capturing bandits alive is a pet project of just Xelani's, after all, who surely isn't present to add up to the discussion. I merely point out that if you, as a CG character and unlike LN Arawn, are unwilling to coup-de-grace subdued foes in cold blood, there's a feasible alternative. If you just choose to ignore it citing a lack of proficiency in "proper rope techniques for mobile incarceration" (when in Pathfinder that skill is just measured by your CMB - which, in Rufus' case, is pretty significant), be my guest.

Hmm. For what it's worth, Korinne doesn't actually disagree with using Color Spray in this instance because it may very well be the deciding factor in victory or getting overrun. And she's not even 100% against using Charm ever, but she would be wary of using that tool too often - not that Arawn has ever said or indicated that he would, but I'm trying to view it from her perspective and her perspective is that she really doesn't know Arawn and doesn't have a good idea yet of how he operates. Speaking OOC, I'm in agreement that realistically it's not feasible to try and take all of these guys prisoner and that except for Kressle we're probably going to have to kill them in combat or execute them afterwards.

One of the reasons I've really taken a liking to PbP is that there's a chance to explore how situations like this affect a character and to be honest, I've never really had a character stop and consider the moral implications of certain spell tactics (or really even had the chance to). However, I didn't mean to make it as big of a deal as it seems to have turned into. Korinne has a lot to think about and some of these early encounters may very well affect where she puts her focus for later spells and abilities, but as she told Rufus (and will repeat to Castor and Arawn) she knew what would be expected of her when she accepted the charter and whatever the party decides to do, she'll do her best to carry out her part.

*edit* I think we're going to have to decide on what level of realism we want to operate under.

Using Color Spray is about all Arawn is realistically going to be able to do in combat. His only other combat spell is a 1d3 ranged attack (without Precise Shot), and using his staff is just laughable (-1 attack, 1d6-1 damage). So, avoiding targets that are engaged in melee with his allies, taking shots at single enemies with Jolt and catching any that group up with Color Spray is honestly his best strategy...

That works; Korinne can always swap out Color Spray for Magic Missile if need be and she's got Acid Splash and Daze as well for dealing with enemies.

*edit* I think we're going to have to decide on what level of realism we want to operate under.

Yep. I wholeheartedly agree.

The only thing I'd like to understand is: even from the most utterly realistic/simulationist point of view, why does taking back a bunch of prisoners seem so unfeasible? I mean - during a robbery, a single armed person can easily control a crowd of 20 unarmed people or more, even if they might very well be able to overpower him if they decided to storm him. They don't because they're afraid, they know that at least some of them are likely to get shot and they don't want to be that guy. Under the threat of being shot by an arrow if they tried to escape, you might even be able to carry them back without tying them (not that I'm advocating it!).

Uff... The more I think about this prisoner/no prisoner debate, the more trivial it seems to get.

Ok let's put it like this: if we opt to lead this AP in the direction of realism and historical accuracy, I'll have no qualms about it. On the contrary, I'll probably find it most enjoyable. But I'm afraid from time to time I might happen to chime in for some honest fact-checking discussion - and if I am proved wrong, well, I'll have learned something!

I can go either way; I've been enjoying myself even with the IC/OOC dithering around and IC friction between some of us. Admittedly I'm used to a lot of minor details being hand-waved in my tabletop group in the interests of saving time, but I'm fine with a little more realism to certain tasks if everyone else is.

As far as taking everyone prisoner, the main reason I was thinking it would be unrealistic isn't related to having to haul them back but more to what we'll do with them once we get back to Oleg's. Sure, we could try and put them to work fixing the place up and some of them might even start to sincerely review their life choices and start down a different path. But even if we could convince Oleg and Svetlana to let us keep them there, the group would still have to stick around to keep an eye on them and keep them in line instead of working on exploring and mapping out the area. Sure, Garess and his men might be planning on staying in the area on a long term basis but they also may only be passing through. That said, if any of them actually surrender then surely we can figure out a way to bring them back with us as prisoners.

Anyhoo, I know Kingmaker is a lot more open in terms of what the party can do and how they want to tackle obstacles so I'm game to go in just about any direction if the rest of the party is, whether that's spending a lot of time rehabilitating bandits and fixing up Oleg's or diving into wilderness exploration or something else entirely.

Random Note - I wonder if all Kingmaker groups spend this much time and energy dithering over how to handle the bandits?

Random Note #2 - I'm beginning to wonder if PM originally set this group up with there being a fair deal of IC friction in mind. We certainly have similar goals but dang if we aren't of multiple minds on how to get there :)

I concur, one the fun things about those PBPs is that we all basically start up as a bunch of strangers, then we get to know each others with all our different RP backgrounds. Indeed, I believe a PBP is only fun when everyone is having fun, so I'm all for making sure that everyone has the chance to develop and use a play-style he finds both meaningful and enjoyable. Having those different perspectives clash and interact is one of the best perks of this particular medium, I think.

Regarding Garess and his men, you're right that in the current state of things we know very little about then to be able to make any long term plan involving their cooperation or even their presence. That is bound to change as soon as our GunMetal GM posts, I believe. OOC, I hope the AP has gracefully supplied us with them just so we can avoid those same inconveniences you mentioned - a way of telling the group "Go explore & fight & do your PC things, we're here so that your back is covered whatever you decide to do". Well, sort of.

Random Note - well, I've heard some horror stories about some of them being TPK'd in the very same fight we actually breezed through, so I count myself fortunate ;)

Random Note #2 - I remember him saying something along the lines of not wanting people explicitly claiming to be gunning for Ruler to avoid unnecessary drama, but then he chose not one but two of them. And then he disappeared. Mumble mumble - wonder if he was just trying to set us up for some sort of social experiment :)

It actually looks like the other group has had their own issues deciding what to do with the bandits as well as other stuff so I don't feel quite as silly now.

Anyhoo, based on in-game posts I think we're more or less agreed to try ambushing one of the watchtowers and to -not- charm Happs. We can tie him up or leave him with the horses or whatever works. Maybe give it a little longer to see if Castor has anything to add and then move things forward to the next day for the Away Team?

-Posted with Wayfinder

Last time I ran this AP, my group didn't bother trying to imprison the bandits. They got their information out of them, then had them all executed.

Then again, they were all Neutral, with one Good exception...

Edit: Also, some fun from 1d4chan.

Pragmatically speaking, that'd be the smartest thing to do - no doubt about that. It'd also fit a LN character perfectly: by his charter, he's the law, and the penance for banditry being death would just mean he's carrying out the rightful sentence.

Things get more... convoluted where good aligned characters are involved (though I'd see an Iomedaean paladin reasoning along similar lines as those above, for instance).

EDIT: Lol, that never gets old. Welcome to the clusterf$$+, then (surprised that it didn't quite pick on the blatant Asoiaf reference that is Brevoy)

Two of them were Chelish, too. And the one CG character was the one who posted the least frequently, so there was no stopping the execution...

They did manage to talk the only bandit that survived the assault on Kressle's camp into giving up the life of banditry. I had planned on making him show back up if they ever reached the later books in the AP, but the game died shortly thereafter.

Whoops, we still have the matter of the mysterious lights to deal with so maybe not a jump to tomorrow just yet...

-Posted with Wayfinder

Yeah, I'm really hoping that's not what I think it is...

Remember, whichever one of us dies first, has to roll up a rogue.

Says the guy who already set himself up as the night watch...

You know, I've never actually played a rogue since my RL group has one or two people that almost always play rogues and rangers. I usually get stuck playing healer...

-Posted with Wayfinder

As the sole divine caster in the group, if I die, I am most likely to roll up... another divine caster. :P

Heh... if I die I am rolling into one of those new ACG classes... ;) and I will probably show up as a dhamphir, just to add to the drama :)

I hope the Away group isn't waiting on me to post but if so, I'll try and get something up soon. Back to work today so it may take me a bit.

-Posted with Wayfinder

Rob has 1 point in Knowledge:Engineering, and isn't exactly the brightest person(average human). Alayi can get her 1 Knowledge:Engineering from him if she wants but she will need a better teacher if you want a reason for having higher.

OK, that explains how she is able to learn her first point... but given she is (at core) a bard, all knowledge checks are considered class skills for her. So after her one she would be at 4 (1 for point put into it, 3 bonus for it being a class skill) and her INT modifier (1) for a total of +5, correct?

Unless your Archetype switched it out for something else, you also are allowed to make knowledge checks even untrained, and with an additional bonus equal to half your Bard level (minimum +1).

Unfortunately, Dervish Dancer gives up Bardic Knowledge, so she won't have the +1. But otherwise, Alayi, you are correct. With the 1 skill point(Dervish Dancer doesn't give up the basic class skills), you will have a +5 Knowledge(Engineering). Funnily enough, much high than Rob has :D

Let me know when the "On the Trail" group is ready to move forward to the morning. If I get a majoriy of yes's I will move forward to describing morning.

Which is why I prefaced my statement with if...
Bard is one of the few classes I pretty much never use alternate Archetypes for, so I don't know what they give up.

That said, I am as ready for tomorrow as I will ever be.

Korinne is ready to face a new day!

-Posted with Wayfinder

Ready.

That is what I thought, which I agree is funny that she can learn more with one point than her teacher... call her 'naturally gifted' or 'understanding the craft's nuances' from her previously learning smithing... or something...

Hey everyone, at the bottom of my most recent post, is the overland map for the area. I will be putting in notes and other things and information is revealed. If I ever get access to the game(i've requested it twice now...) I will add it to the top and keep it there.

I will try to post that(and any other applicable map) there every time I post in the gameplay section

Let me know if anyone has any questions/concerns.

Regarding what exactly we're doing with Happs, whether we tie him up or just trust that he's not stupid enough to try anything, I've chosen to not comment on IC at this point because OOC I'd honestly prefer not to have another lengthy discussion on what to do. Or it may be a result of feeling tired and a little uninspired on the writing front today (in general, not with this game specifically). Heck, Korinne would almost be tempted to suggest a coin toss at this point if it wouldn't come across as being totally flippant about the situation.

I'm curious to see how this goes though, especially since one of the other games I'm in currently has the party in a tight situation (of their own doing, naturally) as well. Turns out short-tempered Kellids, militant Pharasmins and suspicious barbarians don't make for peaceful conflict resolution in most cases; who knew? :3

In other news, thanks for the map GM GM! Hopefully they'll transfer ownership of the game over to you sooner rather than later.

Arawn won't allow Happs to remain with the horses with any real capacity to run off with them. Either he will be bound and hobbled, or he will be Charmed.

Neither I nor my character want to spend 25% of his spell capacity on something that can be solved much more simply.

-Posted with Wayfinder

@Alayi: it's more than fine. No need to encumber with elaborate prose what's essentially a description of the activities for the day. I'll wait for our gmGM to advance our particular thread before posting - since we've already sprinted a couple of hours ahead of the Away Group.

@Xelani: works for me :)

Happy Monday (maybe)! I hope everyone had a good weekend. Today's question: has anyone bought anything from The Great Golem Sale? :)

-Posted with Wayfinder

Anyone else experiencing the fuzz that Rufus reported on the links?

I don't see when I look at it but might be something to do with google drive and being logged in to the correct account...

I think it may well have been my laptop.
I checked them again from my phone & the pictures were just fine...

Yeah, I can see everything fine.

-Posted with Wayfinder

Everything's fine here - on both IE and Firefox

Works fine on my phone and Firefox.

-Posted with Wayfinder

Looks fine here.

To Rufus:

I'll try to keep track of their HP. I'll assume you're not going to try to stabilize them in the middle of combat. Some of them may die just because I want to avoid a repeat of the Great Debate but if at least one of the minions should be able to be stabilized at the end of the fight, then at least one of them will be. Does that sound ok?

For everyone else:

A cross on the square means that the creature is down. Dead or just unconscious will need a heal check or something else appropriate to differentiate.

Thank you. That is all I ask.

Also another note:

This seems to be pretty standard around here but I'll be clear here:

During combat I will try to group people into groups as best as possible by initiative. Posting is first come first served. So for example, say Rufus has a 12 initiative and Korinne has a 13. The two bandits they fight have a 14 and 11. Rufus and Korinne are in an initiative "block" so Rufus and Korinne can post at anytime. Whoever posts first will have their action fire off first, so if Rufus posts before Korinne to attack, he will attack before Korinne even though she has higher initiative. This is just to keep things moving as simply as possible.

Also, feel free to post ahead of time if you think you're action won't affect anyone else's action.

Man. The dice are seriously intent on making us do this the hard way...

-Posted with Wayfinder

Sure seems like it!

I realize I never answered my own question from yesterday so I'll mention that the weekend was good. Went to a wedding on Saturday and then spent most of Sunday playing Rise of the Runelords with my RL group. Since our GM had already bought all of the books for Second Darkness from the sale, I bought him all of the books for Legacy of Fire. Seeing as he's my older brother, I figure they'll make for a nice Christmas gift :)

My weekend was pretty crappy actually >.< Been having some health issues. Threw out my back way back in janurary and it's still giving me grief. Still giving me issues. So, fun times :D