Yes, I looked it up in the thread to confirm!
Question: If there is total concealment up to 5ft, I cannot see what is happening next to Tiber? So I cannot target any spells or anything there? Not even at Tiber? Only Ayalina is at 5ft distance. My choices of doing anything useful seem pretty low.
Can I see where Tiber is hitting and/or where hits toward him are coming?
0_o Ayalina where did you read that there is a check involved with lingering performance?
On that note, I have seen/read some wild rules interpretations lately. This past Sunday, someone successfully convinced another player that Toughness doesn't do anything until after level 3. Also that Grease is a 20x20 square. Sometimes I don't even know y'all, like the words are right there. Are we reading the same words? We can't be reading the same words.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On that note, I have seen/read some wild rules interpretations lately. This past Sunday, someone successfully convinced another player that Toughness doesn't do anything until after level 3. Also that Grease is a 20x20 square. Sometimes I don't even know y'all, like the words are right there. Are we reading the same words? We can't be reading the same words.
This is a safe space. We do not make fun of stupid people here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tiber, you're reading grease wrong. It says "10 ft. square" but what that means is a square with a 10 ft. radius. And since diameter is twice the radius, then in order to have a square with radius 10 ft., it has to have a diameter of 20 ft. So, obviously, that means a 20 ft. square. See?
lmao, I've always played it as being an automatic mechanic, but I remembered reading somewhere while I was trying to sort out concentration rules that some GMs require it?? It might've been a homebrewed rule since I ended up in a lot of forums. @^@
Yay level up! Do you want a post of level up changes?
:D
Leveling now.
I'm back in the hospital--grumblesigh--so a few days break is helpful.
EDIT: But I brought my iPad this time.
I use Herolab for my character. Do you want me to roll for HP here or just use the die roller in Herolab?
Ok. I'm going to use my purple sparkly dice that have elven runes carved on them. They always give me the best rolls.
Well, I guess average is ok.
Er, GM, I didn't roll a concentration check. -panic begins- WAS I SUPPOSED TO?
I think that note was actually for Delena!
-panic abates-
Oh, good. I don't like to read spoilers that aren't mine for story reasons, but I'll be darned if that wouldn't have saved me some heartache. ;;
Yes, it was for me. The reason the arcane check was last was that I actually forgot to do it, and did it on an edit later.
Maybe I should in such cases just make another post with just the roll?
And now for the hit points, with constitution and favored class:
The organization of this AP is top notch. The consistent posting time is also really nice. The disappearing stuff that just occurred was really enjoyable, the suspense was freaking real! I like the multiple aliases too, I know it can be a pain for the GM, but I think it is worth it.
I am enjoying myself and am stoked to see what happens next!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Delena: Just change which die result is for which roll, easy enough to change the text.
I thought that we had discussed why dice roll order mattered in this group, but maybe it was my other campaign. In case we didn't discuss it here, it's not just a matter of aesthetics or GM fiat that GMs ask for rolls in a certain order.
Your dice results on the Paizo boards are fixed to prevent cheating, but it also allows the savvy poster to cheat in posts where multiple dice of the same size are used.
So, when you roll 3d20, you the results are fixed no matter what you do (there is an expiration but it's more than a day), even if you post the third d20 in a new post.
For example, the GM calls for Bob to roll a Fort save vs. death and in the same post puts a Knowledge spoiler for the creature that caught Bob in his gaze attack.
Bob rolls his save and a knowledge check and previews the post: 1, 20.
"Well," Bob thinks, "Let me just edit that." Bob changes his post to show he rolled Knowledge first and then his Fort save.
Rolling in the GM dictated order eliminates any questions.
To add to this mess, I previewed the post, then it bugged, and I copy-pasted my saved text. I got completely different rolls when I posted it.
A bit later noticed the missing Arcane. I decided to add it last if someone had already read my post.
|
|
The disappearing stuff that just occurred was really enjoyable, the suspense was freaking real!
Very glad to hear it! I actually changed a lot about that scene, with the intention of creating suspense. It's good to know those changes worked.
I like the multiple aliases too, I know it can be a pain for the GM, but I think it is worth it.
That is actually the easiest part. The only pain is searching for the best avatar when creating the alias.
@All: Feedback is pretty much a requirement, but it's for your own good. I'm trying to make the game more fun for the five of you, so I need to know what the five of you like and dislike.
I enjoyed the gala a lot. The PbP format limited us somewhat in the execution on the player side, so one critique: I know that you would prefer us to make IC plans IC, but some things just have to be discussed OOC and are faster to discuss OOC in PbP.
The set up is 5 disparate individuals of diverse skills brought together to mingle in a politically charged party where you never know people's agendas. IC, peole aren't going to stand around and say, "I have a +3 bluff, +8 diplomacy, and +1 Sense Motive. What's yours?" On top of that, some of the discovery skills were odd or even out in the weeds (Disable Device or UMD to learn the Baronet's weakness is he prefers change with an eye toward defense?), so conveying IC that Pavo should use his Disable Device skill in some other social way than disabling a device to learn the weakness so others could hit with social skills better was a feat beyond me.
Even the more straight forward things could take days to plan IC in PbP. (Edit: and spending days to prepare to make 1 roll is not an effective use of our posting time, I feel. /edit)
So my suggestion is relax on the making plans IC 'only.' I try to keep my suggestions and plans IC when I can, and it will be easier the more Pavo witnesses the others accomplish, but I can't always make it work.
Overall, I'm having a great time with this AP.
I agree, some of the skills required were very strange, and required quite creative writing to apply in a gala. The 'all happens at once' was sometimes a bit annoying, for example someone trying to find out a weakness at the same time as I'm trying to influence (which would benefit from the weakness), or two people trying to influence same NPC when only one success is needed.
Anyway, it was fun and I liked that we got to start with heavy roleplay instead of heavy combat.
I hope we will meet these NPCs more in the future. I have never had a game where same NPCs stay long enough that I feel I know them.
Permission requests:
Cantrip - Unwitting Ally (APG)
1st - Vanish (APG), if not Vanish, second choice is Saving Finale (APG)
Level up complete pending confirmation or rejection of above spell permissions.
Rebuilt lullaby into dancing lights.
Added several skills (appraise, climb, linguistics, escape artist) with versatile performance filling in some gaps (bluff, sense motive).
Added Celestial through a rank in linguistics so I can understand Thalasou in combat.
Added a rank in Appraise since it seems it will come up.
I enjoyed this whole Gala event and the fact that there were so many different ways to use skills. While I agree that it was sometimes odd to try to bring the appropriate skill to play in-character, I appreciated that there were so many different skill options. I also thought that starting with a big social encounter allowed us to explore our characters and personalities more.
The support materials (google slides) were very good and helpful for keeping track of things. It made it a lot easier for me to plan my actions since I could review the slides and see what still needed to be done.
I was thrown for a loop a little bit when we started because there was some indication that we might not want to share the details of our missions and tasks with other players. Because of this, for my first few postings I tried to keep things vague. I think that that lead to inefficiencies. If we had communicated, in character, what we were trying to do then we might have had more successes earlier on.
The only slightly unpleasant thing so far is something that I'm conflicted on. I really like the posting rate but there are times when I feel pressure (in RL) that I *have to* get my post done and it needs to be quality RP. TBH, there were a couple times that this was demotivating. I don't know if there's a way around that. As I said, I like the posting rate and I know that in order to keep that up, there has to be a little pressure to encourage people to post. Maybe it would be ok to give players the permission to make a bare-bones move once per week. By "bare bones move" I mean, just post the a sentence, maybe even OOC, that says what they are doing and then the rolls. I know that full RP posts are much better but maybe having that lite option would reduce some of the RL pressure.
I think that's all of my feedback.
I think I'm in the same boat re: IC interactions. I really, really like that we're spending most of them in-character and in the game, but there are some interactions that are faster to decide on with handwavy logic because we're not playing this game in real time.
On the other hand, I've been really enjoying the roleplay, the details, and honestly, the careful attention you've been giving the game and your posts makes me feel really proud to say I'm playing here. That maybe sounds cheesy, but it's a thing, okay. I really like that everyone else is so... literate.
Which maybe sounds terrible and bad, but given some of the very brief posts and roll 'em types that I've encountered in the world of pbp, it's really exciting to see how everyone's writing their characters and rolling with the dice and all. I feel like I'm learning a lot from your posts - I'm having lots of fun!
Presently, I'm a little scatterbrained because I... haven't been home in a month. o_o Well, not literally a month, but certainly for three weeks. I'll finally be home again later this week, but a last minute change in plans means that my Grandma is going to be flying home with me... So things are going to be a little crazy this week. I'll definitely still be eyeing the site every day (except for maybe Tuesday, because that's when we're flying), but if I'm extra derpy, that's why.
But yeah, that's what your resident goob is thinking! c: I, uh. I hope it's as coherent as my brain thinks it is.
|
|
All three spells are fine. I may change my mind on unwitting ally though, after seeing how it plays. I would definitely allow it if only the caster benefits from the new "ally". Letting all PCs benefit might be too strong for a cantrip.
-----
As a player, one of my favorite things is figuring out how to role-play odd skills and situations, and how to communicate ooc mechanics. I guess I just assumed everyone likes that challenge as much as I do. But, I'm not a player here, and you guys seem in agreement on wanting some leeway, so you've got it.
-----
Some of the NPCs are explicitly written into later books, and some I will try to add myself. But there will also be a lot of times when the PCs will need to be proactive and seek out somebody yourselves--especially Nicodemus and Cicato.
-----
The early confusion on secrecy vs. cooperation was intentional. Martella was judging you a little bit. Kind of like when the boss sends out a new assassin with an unloaded gun or lies about the victim having no bodyguards.
-----
As far as posting quality and quantity: I do not mind the occasional "Long day, short post. Here are my dice." Obviously, if it gets excessive, we'll have to have The Talk.
-----
Did I catch everything? Let me know if I missed something.
Re: Unwitting Ally. That is how I read the spell: the target counts as the caster's ally. The more important function is that the target is none of his allies' ally (negating flanking and potential sneak attack damage from that as well). The DC is, of course, pathetically low, so I may regret taking it.
I like to keep as much IC as possible too, but some things are just a stretch too far for me. I mean, I could intentionally tank some efforts--like spending my social rounds using my +2 history on Nicodemus when Thalasou had a much higher bonus and ignoring that I could reasonably discover Cicato's weakness using DD to give the others a fighting chance at influencing him--but is that fun for my tablemates?
|
|
I mean, I could intentionally tank some efforts--like spending my social rounds using my +2 history on Nicodemus when Thalasou had a much higher bonus
This is a good example of a dilemma that I enjoy. I probably would have made a historical comment IC, with an OOC note for Thalasou. For example:
Pavo noticed Thalasou staring at the ancient breastplate and walked over to show off a little, "Did you know that General Arnisant didn't actually like this armor? He just wore it to honor his father for his mother's sake, and stopped as soon as she passed away."
I'm done too!
Yeah, me too. Thought I posted but I see that I didn't. My profile is updated.
I think I'm done. I took Identify and Endure Elements as my new spells, they are not actively prepared but nice to have occasionally, and useful for downtime days.
Anyway, we are in a big city, so a missing first level spell is just a couple of gold pieces away if I change my mind.
Just got off the plane. Probably will crash as soon as I get home, but I'll try to finish leveling details when I'm alive again tomorrow. @^@
|
|
I am debating an idea, and want to know what others think.
While talk is a free action, it's not supposed to be unlimited. However, nobody actually imposes a limit, effectively making it unlimited, and I have seen a few games where characters say whole paragraphs in a combat round.
I don't want to impose a limit just for its own sake, though. Granted, I'm a weirdo, but I think I would actually enjoy it as a player. For example, having to condense a knowledge check into under six seconds of speech, or taking multiple rounds to convey tactics--things which are all realistic.
I try not to monologue in combat.
However:
1. Talking as a Free action is not just on your turn. You can talk for the full 6 seconds of a round, and...
2. I find people have a poor idea of how much can be said in a given time frame. I routinely explain what to expect from a cold over the next two weeks and how to manage it in under 10 seconds. Type it, no, speak it, yes.
3. Is it really more fun to force Bob the Brainy Wizard to dumb down and say, "Fire! Cold Iron! No blunt!" instead of "Strike it with cold iron blades or fire if you have it!" when it comes down to the same mechanical effect?
Villain monologues, pious speeches, and witty banter are part of the genre. I don't see a need to fix this 'problem'.
|
|
I suspect we are envisioning completely different scenarios.
1. Talking as a Free action is not just on your turn. You can talk for the full 6 seconds of a round, and...
We're in agreement there: I already mentioned that it would be 6 seconds of speech.
2. I find people have a poor idea of how much can be said in a given time frame. I routinely explain what to expect from a cold over the next two weeks and how to manage it in under 10 seconds. Type it, no, speak it, yes.
Very true. Part of how I got this idea is that I actually learned in college how quickly the brain processes speech, and thus how much most people say in a time period.
3. Is it really more fun to force Bob the Brainy Wizard to dumb down and say, "Fire! Cold Iron! No blunt!" instead of "Strike it with cold iron blades or fire if you have it!" when it comes down to the same mechanical effect?
The latter is well within what I had in mind, and is probably ~4 seconds in normal speech.
Villain monologues, pious speeches, and witty banter are part of the genre. I don't see a need to fix this 'problem'.
I don't see a 'problem' that needs fixing, but rather a potential opportunity. But let's look at your specific examples:
OK, then I don't see the problem or opportunity. Please explain.
And that longer knowledge blurb from Bob the Wizards was just under 2 seconds to shout (and probably took that long because I was reading it).
What would such a limit look like? Would we want to have a few traditional combats first to see how our combat dialogue seems to go first?
GM, sent you my level up questions! c: And I think my only question about the speech thing is about how people can speak at different rates.
The average person, according to the glory of the google search, speaks at about 125-150 words per minute. I'm something of a chatterbox, so I break 200 regularly, especially if I'm excited about something. For the sake of consistency, though, I think 125-150 is a safe number of words to work with.
One minute = ten rounds
One round = 12.5-15 words?
I think a quick message or blurb along these lines is okay? If nothing else, deciding how best to handle those twelve to fifteen words might be an interesting roleplay challenge. :)
Hmm. I did a couple "tests" myself. Said a few things and timed it. I tried to speak normally.
"Hey, watch out. There's a trap there and it looks like a big hole with lots of spikes at the bottom."
That took me ~4 seconds to speak out loud and I wasn't rushing. That is something I might say in combat. If I was not in combat I might say something like this:
"Watch out there. Looks like someone created a pit trap. You know, the kind that's a gigantic hole with a bunch of sharp spikes at the bottom. Probably a bunch of bones and other junk in there too."
It makes sense to me that we use a tone in our posting that is consistent with the sense of time present in combat. I think that I naturally already do this. I think that most people do.
I have sometimes thought about this, as some chats seem to be somewhat long. At a table there are often very long chats in a single round. I usually try to keep the lines somewhat sort. It is hindered a bit by my characters being talkative, and making a line that shows the personality of a character often takes more words than just expressing the idea.
Usually it is not a problem, but I was thinking at the Malphene encounter that the lines were quite long. We were not fighting, but in initiative, and if that means 6 second lines, it was kind of stretch.
One point about talking about tactics: I think an adventuring team would discuss about possible tactics in off-screen time, and the discussions during combat are partly a reflection of them. Of course, we could have a 100-post long combat planning where we went through a lot of possible enemies and ways to deal with them, but it might get a bit boring.
I think we mostly do write reasonably short texts in combat, but I don't oppose trying a limit. I don't know what kind of limit would work best, words or characters? And do articles count?
Ayalina, give your chatter a challenge: try to say all the lines in the Malphene encounter in six seconds. :)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Looks like everybody is leveled up. Any last questions or comments before we start back up? Or would people prefer to wait until Monday, to avoid a start-stop feeling over the weekend?
And we will not be doing the word limit thingy. Though if somebody goes way overboard, they may have to fight the next dragon with a ketchup bottle.
As for ooc/hindsight tactical discussions, part of my plan for downtime activities should accomplish some of that.