I'll take the composite bow if it has a strength bonus I can benefit from, otherwise I'll just take one of the regular ones.
As it says Composite Longbow (+2 STR), so if that is beneficial to you then take it!
Don't particularly care who's taking what, but another thing to consider is frequency of use and likeliness of hitting. If someone else has bow as a primary weapon.
Well since the DM didn't appear to be stepping in on this one in the form of one of the higher authority NPCs and we've already wasted days of real time arguing over a debate that has no "right" answer (see hundreds of years of debate on capital punishment) Grendolynn did what she was brought here to do.
I find it really really really hard to believe that people raised in a brutal medieval context (without neuroscience or psychology) would be acting like modern liberals the way some of these characters do. I mean all the characters know there are all powerful supernatural beings who sort out the dead and send them to their proper destination AS A FACT. They also know immortality of the soul is a fact. There is no reason to be merciful in Pathfinder world, there's no uncertainty. Happs' soul will end up on whatever plane it deserves.
---------------------------
unrepentant |ˌənriˈpentənt|
adjective
showing no regret for one's wrongdoings : he was unrepentant and said that his comments were completely accurate.
Happs: "We killed a few people in our time and since I am not in a position to get away with a lie. I enjoyed killing... the rush of power when you have another person's life in your hands and they beg for it." The bandit gives a bit of a shiver as he relives some kill..."
"I gave up regret and remorse long ago so I didn't get my throat slit by my men. I won't start begging and crying at the end of life now like the others. Kill me and be done with it. Hang me or run me through. I am done talking..."
"Better break something; I would suggest the hand. That is where I always started."
and even under the influence of magic, compelling him to be honest...
"I will not apologize for the things that I have done because I did what I had to do to survive."
Known to her faithful as the Dawnflower, the Healing Flame, and the Everlight, Sarenrae (pronounced SAER-en-ray[1]) teaches temperance and patience in all things. Compassion and peace are her greatest virtues, and if enemies of the faith can be redeemed, they should be. Yet there are those who have no interest in redemption, who glory in slaughter and death. From the remorseless evil of the undead and fiends to the cruelties born in the hearts of mortals, Sarenrae's doctrines preach swift justice delivered by the scimitar's edge.
Okay. Done defending my actions now. We had a reason to keep him alive for information, but now that he's spilled the beans we were just wasting time.
The NPCs have a place in the game, but this is not their story. Kesten has dozens of people to over see, and the questioning of one bandit is low on that list of priorities especially given the fact that the group was put in charge of the exploring and bandits so there is no plausible reason for him to intercede except DM fiat.
I like to add as an aside that Golarion does have atheists.
Just remember that actions have reactions. Consequences may come or they may not... Kesten doesn't even know that Grendolynn removed the head of the bandit yet.
Though on a completely meta-note there was more to learn about Gaedran Lamm.
Just to organize the plot-lines currently opened...
What happened to Auchs?
Kressle's Camp
Gaedran Lamm
The Stag Lord
Anything involving the bandit attack on the wedding and/or the poisoning of the King/Lord Regent.
Oh, and I have to be up in 5 hours for work so I will formulate real in game posts tomorrow night after I get off work for Tad/Morley and the rest of the party.
Um Grendolynn, for all that you & I play together in more than one campaign (), I'm not certain that any of us know each other well enough to assume that we know the other player's opinion of the character's actions.
I, for one, consider Grendolynn's actions entirely in character & eminently justified.
That said, I can also see other viewpoints. I'm not saying this to attack yours, but Tad would actually have argued for redemption had he stayed as he had already determined at least one of the salient aspects of Happs' character prior to the spell being cast.
Pause for Irony:
Everyone take a breath & chill for a minute. Remember it's just a game.
Ironic Pause concluded.
@DundjinnMasta: Not certain we, the PC's, have decided to add Geadran Lamm to our list of priorities yet. I recognize the name (), but I am not sure any one else does. I know Tad is honestly less than interested in anything not directly applicable to our immediate goals as dictated by the writ, unless they also impact on his sister. Which Lamm doesn't, really. Now if there winds up being some connection between Lamm & the 'Stag Lord' beyond people who's lives have been ruined being particularly susceptible to the Stag Lord's enticements; then Lamm gets put on Tad's agenda.
I'm in a game with Erostil (Elves vs Dwarfs), and another game with Grendolynn (Rappan Athuk).
Antha had previously made her statement condemning the man, but was very reluctant to play an active role given her own history of not exactly respecting the law. If anything, she's only shocked by how quickly the matter was settled.
Apology not accepted, none needed.
I think there's the group/mission agenda and personal crusades. And sometimes we use the group agenda to justify actions.
We each should know what will be going too far.
Conflict builds character.
Nobody said all the conflict would be with NPC's.
It was a good role-playing opportunity, and helped develop my thoughts and ideas behind my own character. No apologies necessary.
By the way who is Gaedran Lamm? I don't recall hearing about that person.
Extorted Happs, turned him to a life of crime.
I recognize the name from the Curse of Crimson throne player's guide, but all we know about him here is that he extorted Happs, as Valeska said.
--------
I'm totally chill, and not mad at any player in any way (hopefully none are mad at me). In character Grendolynn is serious, but somewhat emotionally unstable. Especially when it comes to men who are violent towards women/girls. She's the equivalent of an ultra-conservative morally (loaded statement, but can't think of another way to put it). Out of character I agree that you shouldn't kill people unless you absolutely have to. Grendolynn does not. In her book plenty of people deserve to die, and while she's not going to go out and hunt them down when given legal authority to off them she totally will.
I thought since we were at the 'trial' phase that we were done gathering information, sorry if I cut off anything important. But we seemed to have gotten everything he knew about the camp and the stag lord, which appears to be our immediate objective.
Again apologies, but I'm playing the character. I don't consider anything but PVP (and undeniably evil actions) out of line. If someone's character has a problem with Grendolynn then feel free to yell at/scold/whatever her in game. If another player has a problem with me as a player I'd like to resolve it peacefully and quickly. Not trying to ruin anyone's fun. The exact opposite in fact, I hope we all have a good time.
He did seem like he was thawing... With the truth out there, there was no longer a need for him to maintain the facade. Erostil was making progress, it seemed.
And another character had mentioned a tribunal, us all being equal. That's the part that sticks out the most. Where 9 were supposed to decide... well, the rest is history.
Not mad though.
If we have to come to a 9 person consensus (something we've failed to do on any point yet) about what to do with every captured NPC this game is going to drag on forever. We either need some convenient way to dispose of them (ie have one the NPCs agree to start hiring them on or something) or kill them after they talk. Otherwise this becomes the story of what to do with a bunch of prisoners who may or may not want to be rehabilitated instead of the heroic tale of pacifying the stolen lands.
If Valeska feels the nine should vote on major decisions, bring it up in character. Grendolynn would likely be amenable. As long as they aren't decisions about letting rapists live.
Someone else said it, not V. Like I said, no particular vested interest either way.
We can just shift our tactics so that the enemy isn't given an opportunity to surrender, thus avoiding the discussion on how we can dispose of the prisoners.
The further we are from civilization the more often we'll need to become the judge, jury and executioner. Happs was in a convenient location where we could afford to discuss the topic. I don't see it being as easy the deeper we get into the jungle, so to speak.
There certainly won't be time to reform someone as deep in it as Happs was, but there may be others who are only on the periphery of it all. Copious use of Sense Motive (which, as Tad pointed out, was not very prevalent in this conversation) should help determine the difference.
Of course, as said: no prisoners, no worries.
stuff
Except for the part about not allowing enemies to surrender, what Arasmes said.
Basically after someone makes an unprovoked deadly attack on her, Grendolynn considers them fair game. So that's how she's going to behave. Just fair warning to all. Now if someone across the battlefield surrenders to Erostil or something and the battle is over she won't run over and kill them. But I agree that the less prisoners we take the better. We should only attempt that if we believe they have valuable information.
Stayed pretty busy for Halloween.
We had all of 20 kids or so at our house. My wife would have been disappointed at the lack of turnout, but our son was asleep and the dog barks every time someone comes up to the door so it was likely for the best.
Sorry, rebuilding servers in Rochester, NY. Effects of Sandy.
I just ralized I hadn't posted in a while. Just letting folks know I'm still here. Lurking through the posts mainly.
I wasn't aware that we were digging the grave in the middle of the keep, so wasn't sure how to respond.
No one really mentioned where the questioning or killing had taken place and since it wasn't stated that Happs was removed then the scene was happening in the small keep somewhere. It doesn't necessarily mean the exact center of the keep, but it was definitely in the keep.
I added a new map in the Campaign Info under the Campaign Atlas. It is a map specifically of the Greenbelt that I have numbered and will be color coordinated.
The Hex Color Key has to do with the number of the hex and what color those numbers are. If a hex is claimed then it is considered to have been "Explored" since you can't claim a hex that is unexplored. This won't have a real effect until the second module.
Currently the Border Keep is unnamed so it appears on the map as "Border Keep".
Any questions or comments?
No questions or comments really that I can't address or ask IC.
Just taken a look at the map, and really like what you have there. Seems really good. Can't wait to see where the story takes us.
For my own records and everyone else's records as well since I noticed I don't have a full list in a single place. (This has been a day of reorganization for me!)
The current list of character and positions in the later part of the game...
Antha Scapegrace as the Magister.
Arasmes Vors as the High Priest.
Teyran as the General.
Erostil Vramir as the Grand Diplomat.
Grendolynn as the Warden.
Thadeuzs 'Tad' Orlovsky as the Royal Assassin.
Valeska Talanova as the Marshal.
Morley Worgendale as the Councilor.
In light of the fact that our humble abode has no name, I suggest that we all start calling it Teyran Rilskel's House of Awesome!
That wasn't me getting overly excited, the exclamation point is actually part of the name.
You may not remember but the role of "ruler" is something that will be handled in character within the campaign when we get to that point. I purposely had everyone select a non-ruler role with their character concepts as I feel by the time it comes to selecting a "ruler" there will be a more clear idea.
Yeah, my suggestion for a name was a joke. Though I have to say that it has a certain ring to it, even if Teyran doesn't become king.
OK, so after the "entire family is sick and grad school homework is still not complete" weekend - I'm still here... with 33 new posts to get caught up on for just this game!
We're falling into this stalemate tavern scene thing... We're either role playing or we're not. Everyone can't be doing or as good as everyone else in everything. Even at first level.
So, based on mechanics (race/class) and personality (attitude, and let's not flip-flop too much)... we really should be differentiating ourselves. Don't want to leave folks out of decision making, but this looks to be a well rounded and long campaign to come. There will plenty of opportunity for story arcs to showcase one or another character.
She'll express it in character when it comes up... Valeska is both mechanics-wise and personality-wise a tactical leader. She's been trained for it and has the drive/attitude/energy. That doesn't make her an assault leader... or the wisdom of the ages military commander.
So, if you want to be a leader, state it... if you don't mind being led in combat situations, say it... but let's pick something and go with it, wasn't that sorta the point of the non-ruling roles?
DM - I have Grendolynn's alignment on paper as NG, but I'm ending up playing her a lot more as LN now that we have some time under our belts. Okay with you if I change it?
----------------------------
I think in situations when we know we're going to get into a fight, if someone has a good idea they should say it. I'd be happy to lead as a player, but Grendolynn has never led anyone before.
For taking on the camp, we first need to find it. Then I still like the idea of Valeska and Antha acting and perhaps one 'guard' acting as bait to draw them into an ambush. Valeska, if you want to be battle leader why don't you throw that out there in response to Grendolynn's snarkyness. She would respect that and be willing to go along with it. As I'm sure everyone else would.
The problem with PBP is a conversation that would take 10-15 minutes in real life can take weeks in PBP with the added obfuscation of text based communication. Without DM inserted events to show time is passing (which he kinda just did with the lunch thing) we could essentially sit here talking until Christmas and only a half hour would have passed in game.
Grendolynn - Okay.
Ummm, just to be clear... not looking for PvP.
Grendolynn on purpose or by accident (player) claimed "mandate of heaven" (I have taken an oath or oaths, I don't recognize any leadership present, I'll do what I feel I must, screw you), so there's not much to do about that for now. It's sorta CN, disguised as LN.
At least that's how it came across. Sure it was followed by "let's discuss". Eh...
The worst part if the effective tavern scene. I'm enjoying the RP and characters (and players), just not the stalemate.
Of course there won't be any PVP.
No accident about it. She killed him on purpose out of anger and disgust, justified by the law. What she apologized for was not waiting, and for screaming at Erostil. She acknowledges only lawful lords and ladies that she's sworn an oath to as leaders and has been very respectful and demurring to them whenever they were present. How is that CN?
I don't see a need to appoint one PC as 'leader' over the others. Pathfinder is meant to be a cooperative game, not all the players listen to one other one. Especially in a party this big with character's opinions varying so widely, and the open ended nature of our 'quest'. Basically from what I can tell we've got Valeska and Erostil wanting to save people. Tad, Grendolynn and Teyran saying they've got it coming. Then Morley, Antha and Arasmes playing a sort of neutral role.
All of that is moot though. The guy we had is dead. What's going to move us on past this "tavern" scene is making a plan and executing it. That's what I'm going to try to do now.
Killing is done. No issues there, truthfully. It will come up as something that happened, an event. But my intent is not to hold Gren's feet to the proverbial fire. Or torture you as a player.
Cool, sounds good :)
Been posting from phone... short, sweet! :)
No sparring? Non-lethal, -4 to hit?
Actually, sure, Tad will spar with Valeska.
As usually the end of my week got hectic, but I am getting ready to post soon.
For the record, I want it noted I never intended Tad to be this much of a shifty bastard. I read too many socio/political intrigue novels...
Valeska is more Tom Sawyer. I'm just trying to keep things moving in a "show don't tell" manner.
Privacy for Akiros, right? Dirty dog.
Privacy for Akiros, right? Dirty dog.
D'oh! Yeah. The intent is to allow Akiros privacy, as Kesten suggested. Tad doesn't care if his sparring with Valeska has an audience.
And no I'm not reading anything more into that statement,not gonna
you can't make me
nope.