|
Those chosen dot in, I'll do one final check over of the crunch of characters. I also have a few questions to ask.
1. Would you rather have theater of the mind, or maps in Roll20?
2. Would you rather have death follow normal rules of con score+1, or would you rather die at con 1.5+1 Example- con of 10, at -11 you are dead, or at -16 you are dead. Note this will apply to NPCs and enemies as well. (including ones with ferocity)
3. A minor change, when you roll HP for Even levels- a d6 HD can roll no lower than a 2, a d8 can roll no lower than a 3, a d10 can roll no lower than a 4, and a d12 can roll no lower than 5. (or, the minimum HP you can roll is half your HD -2)
4. If you all would, I would appreciate it if you created a mythweaver sheet for your characters Crunch. I am used to using it, and it would make things easier on me.
1: I have a pretty strong preference for theatre of the mind, but it's by no means a deal-breaker
2: I like normal death, I've found it relatively difficult to die if one is cautious once you get to about 5th level, (please don't take that as a challenge :) ) but I like the threat of death.
3: Cool!
4: On it!
1 - Theatre of the Mind is fun, but I have found with larger parties, mapping helps to keep things clear. So I put my vote forward for Roll20.
2 - Barring situations of massive damage, I have generally used the Con+1 and it has worked out well. My home group did adopt the caveat that a character who dies (con+1 negative HP) can be saved with a healing spell in the same round combined with a hero point and some good role-playing - clearly a house rule, but it is fun. Con x1.5 might allow for a bit more heavy damage, if we are looking at giants and dragons, that might be wise.
3 - sounds good.
4 - I have never used mythweaver before, but will set up an account and get underway with it.
How did we end up in a "Knights" game without either a Paladin or a Cavalier?! Ha!
I'm doing my best flavor wise, but yeah that is pretty funny!
Hello everyone!
1. A mixture is fine for me. TotM is fine, but when there are larger fights with multiple enemies a map can help.
2. Con+1 would get my vote.
3. No problem there.
4. Might take awhile but I'll get around to it. Haven't used myth weavers before, and there are alot of crunchy little details in the profile to be moved over.
-------
"How did we end up in a "Knights" game without either a Paladin or a Cavalier?! Ha!"
Well...Spring is going to become a paladin. So I suppose that counts. :)
Hello gents!
1. Generally what the others have said. I have played an AP in TotM, but i find maps for larger encounters a plus.
2. Con +1 has my support.
3. Np. Here's to hoping for good rolls.
4. I am new to Mythweavers, i'll get it up today or tomorrow.
Hello everyone!
1. I don't mind either way, but I think sometimes having a map is better - particularly during larger combats or where maneuvering or positioning is important. So slight preference towards Roll20 but we could even do a mix of the two where smaller scale / minor conflicts could be done 'in mind' and more complex ones in Roll20. IDK just a thought.
2.Con +1 has my vote here.
3. No problem here.
4. I haven't used Mythweavers before but I'll give it a go and try and get it done today or tomorrow.
For what its worth, Rena's familiar, Rhiannon was a Paladin in its previous life so technically its covered :)
I've switched skillfocus from stealth to Craft Alchemy. More fitting for background.
Mythweaver sheet is partially filled in, but time wise i'll finish it tomorrow.
1. I tend to do better with maps but TotM works as well.
2. Con +1 works for me. In my games I do give a chance for a healing spell to save you.
3. That's fine.
4. Never used mythweavers, it may take a day or two
I also have never used mythweavers, but here's my best shot at it! Let me know if I need to fix anything, or if you can't see it. Sheet!
Should we also do stuff like introductions/relationships, and potential build pathing to create team cohesion, or is that a later discussion?
So...which is better at lvl1. Deadly Aim and Weapon Focus (+2 damage) or Deadly Aim and Rapid Shot (+1 attack, -3 hit +2 damage)?
I mean, my usual go to for calculating such things is which would my character be more scared of fighting in a mirror match against themselves, but that doesn't take into account flavor. You more of the spray 'n pray type, or the calculated sniper type?
|
|
You all have spent the better part of the past year and a half together. So please feel free to discuss potential relationships. I plan to have the first post up Friday or Saturday if all things go well.
Also, How would you all like to try something with me I've been considering.
An Injury System,
premise- HP in Pathfinder, as I see it, is a mixture of stamina, energy, and general toughness. 40 HP damage isn't Slicing an arm off, its more like a solid blow landing and cutting through the armor to cut the arm. As such, no great lethal harm comes from normal HP damage.
However, after being reduced to 0 or below DOES indicate potentially lethal damage. As such, to represent this I've been working on an injury chart.
So, each time you are reduced to 0 (or lower) you make a con check. The DC would be something like, 10+negative HP. (so, if an attack reduced you to -6, the con check DC would be 16.) If you pass, you are fine. If you fail, you roll a further d20 to determine what injury it is. This can be something permanent (such as losing an eye, an arm, or maybe just a small limp), with only minor detriments immediately, to something life threatening at that moment but unlikely to cause lasting issues.
I would of course give you all a small boon, as this system is more or less a negative to you mechanically, but thematically I enjoy the concept greatly. It also provides just a little more incentive to keep people from risking that drop.
Heck yeah, mess me up. Add a reason for the combat medic to exist, and for me to have a maximized heal skill, as opposed to magical healing.
Hello everyone! Sorry for my lateness, I've just now had a chance to check on the thread.
Re: Injury System - I'm going to be honest, I am not a fan of it. There's something in Skull and Shackles that is kinda like this, though there was a damage threshold or required a critical, but to me, it results in two things.
1) It takes away the narrative impact of having a character maimed in a scarring way, even if the detriments are only temporary. To me, if you're going to potentially handicap a character, then it should have some narrative weight to it. It should be a boss and not some nameless bandit that happened to get lucky taking out a PC's eye or crippling them.
2) It changes the tone of the game. I was expecting something closer to swashbuckling high-fantasy with some gaslamp fantasy (Think Girl Genius) thrown in for flavor. This makes things more gritty and darker, and I don't want to play that.
That isn't to say that characters can't or shouldn't die, that would take away some of the fun of a tough fight I think. I do think that like crippling injuries, character deaths should have meaning and impact, but I'm not going to whine too much if Sprig is on the receiving end of a lethal crit. I just hope that her death will serve a purpose.
Now that I've thrown my two cents in on that topic, time to catch up with the rest of the thread.
WHen I started reading this I was, "No Way!" I'm in a game using the wounds system and don't particularly like it. But, this isn't what you are doing. I'd hate to lose an eye at 1 HP but I don't know how set you are in your system. I could see this where death isn't at -con but when you fail the con check and the second d20 is high. For the second roll you have a table 1-25 or so. Roll d20 subtract Con Bonus add negative HP. 1 on the table could be: Concussion -X to mental checks for Y Days. 10: Could be lose a hand. 15 could be bleeding out, X bleed per round. 20 dead 25 decapitated. The specifics for the second roll are up to you but something with the higher the number the worse the consequence. For example your 1st level fighter with 13 HP gets critted by a scythe for 32 damage. You're at -19 and normally dead. The Con check DC is 29. You can't pass it. So just just roll d20 subtract 2 for your con mod and add 19. If death on the chart isn't until you hit 20, you would survive on a roll of 1 or 2. Not much of a chance but a chance, though you're probably horribly disfigured and maybe a vegetable.
If you already have a full idea of the system, I'd give it a go but wouldn't be upset if we didn't.
my 2 cents
|
|
note, when I state "permanent" nothing in Pathfinder is permanent. There will be plenty of ways for characters to overcome any handicap given to them. Ether through high level magic or more, esoteric or inventive ways. Such as gaining a regenerate spell. Or, perhaps you work with inventors from Nasar to create a device that returns your vision in your lost eye?
This campaign is a mixture of Noblebright, and NobleDark. I know that doesn't make much sense at the moment.
The world IS dangerous, a sword is a sword. Chance will have its say, however, you (hopefully) will be able to rise above that, overcoming whatever the universe dares to throw your way and stand tall. Thus, yes, you are hero's of a high fantasy. However, it is made even grander in the sense that not only are you (or, will be) Grand hero's but heroes in a deadly world. A world growing more dangerous as the call for heroes grows.
I will finish up the system and provide you all the rules it would function under. And feel free to provide suggestions as Warren.
Good advice, Terrel. I’ll switch to weapon focus for now. Thanks. :)
I’m also alright with the injuries. No complaints on my end.
If you want to use it, then there's not much I can do to stop you. I could quit, but that is a childish thing to do just because I don't like a rule. I don't want to quit, so I guess I'll have to live with the rules you decide to put into play. I really wish this had been brought up during recruitment and not right as we're about to play. It feels, I dunno. It's just something that feels like an unpleasant surprise, like thinking you're about to taste something sweet and it turns out bitter instead or that you're going to be eating something with one texture and mouthful, and it's something totally different.
I would argue that you can make things more grim with narrative and don't necessarily implement rules that fundamentally change the character of the game, but I think things have already been decided and I've already made my opinion on this clear, so no point in rehashing things.
Questions:
1. I'd rather theatre of the mind, but Roll20 is alright too.
2. I'm fine either way or with what Warren suggested with some tweaks. (I'd rather not make it too punishing)
3. I get the appeal, but if you're going through that much trouble to state minimums, why not change it to something like:
1d6 => 2+1d4
1d8 => 2+1d6
1d10 => 2+1d8 or 2+2d4
1d12 => 2+1d10 or 4+2d4
or use something more like I use:
1d6 => 3+1d3
1d8 => 4+1d4
1d10 => 5+1d5
1d12 => 6+1d6
4. Okay, this one I'm not going to do. I have a hard enough time leveling a character in a timely manner that I'm not about double the workload by having to maintain two character sheets. If you want me to make changes to how my character sheet is laid out, then I will make them, but I think have everything where I show how I got what I'm getting. I really don't want to go through the trouble of doing everything twice.
And again, this is something that I would have liked to have known was coming in recruitment if you were always planning on doing this.
Apologies if I seem like a jerk here, that last one has left me more than mildly annoyed.
|
|
Please understand creating your sheet in mythweavers was never a demand. For any of you, you do not need to keep both updated either. I would prefer if you used the mythweavers sheet and kept it up to date, however if you would prefer to only use a layout in your alias that is acceptable. Using mythweavers was only a request. I just find it easier to read through an actual PF sheet is all. Apologies if it seemed out of place to request. Or if it came off as a demand.
Sorry, I've been under a lot of stress in the past month and a half, and not because of the election. That still doesn't excuse blowing things out of proportion.
Going back and looking at the actually wording of the question, it is a little more clear that it's not meant as a demand, I just took it that way.
Anyway, back to trying to draw something tonight. Thinking of a dwarf or gnome, but I may do Sprig instead. Who knows? :P
1: We could always just play with the called shot and massive damage rules that already exist in paizo, although they do have some issues with them.
2: I am open to people sending me PM's (actually scratch that, I love getting messages and talking to people, it makes my day please do it) to talk about potential relations between characters. I've read most of your backgrounds at this point, but things are constantly shifting. Anyway yeah! Looking forward to this, I'm sure we can hash this stuff out.
|
|
I made some last minute changes due to concerns, It ended up creating a mildly more complex system than I originally intended. Originally there was only one roll after failing the con check. However, to better exemplify the idea that you are indeed high-fantasy heroes, I attempted to... tier, the injuries. This new system also allows characters that would normally die to live on. Note, I had to add new things to minor injuries, and anything formatted as- (Thing?) is an open question for thoughts.
I haven't filled in all the slots for the "minor Injury" rolls after changing it and creating two separate charts, so if you had an idea feel free to share.
Injury System
Minor/non death injuries
When reduced to 0 or fewer Hit Points, make a Con check with a DC of 10+negative hit points. If successful, no additional injury is sustained. On a fail, roll a d20 and consult the following chart-
1: Roll on Major/Death Injury chart
2: Pierced lung, you immediately begin suffocating, this functions as if under the Suffocation spell. This injury can only be repaired by a successful heal check at a DC of (5-10+damage taken from triggering attack?) or through application of regenerative magic(such as the regenerate spell). (affects that heal only hit points or ability score damage are not enough). Successful Heal checks equal to DC 20 resets the target to unconscious and at 0. (though does not cure it) to a limit of Con score times.
3:
4-5:Blind Eye- The character loses vision in one of their eyes. Either the eye is lost entirely or is damaged enough for loss of vision. This applies a -2 to perception checks and ranged attack rolls. If a character suffers this injury twice, and has only two eyes, they are permanently blinded until their vision is healed (such as by use of the regenerate spell).
6-7: Missing Finger- The character loses 1 to 2 of their fingers on either hand. This gives a -1 to all melee and ranged attacks involving that hand. Missing Fingers may be cured by use of Heal(if finger is preserved and present for casting) or Regenerate spell, or replaced with bionics.
8-9:Limp- This character received a terrible blow to their leg. They permanently reduce their movement speed by 5ft. A character can take one week of recovery along with 5 successful DC20 heal checks to remove this condition. Or via use of heal or regenerate spell.
10-11 Cut Artery- Character immediately suffers 5 bleed damage and continues to take bleed damage at the end of their turns in addition to the 1 point of bleed damage normally taken from being below 0. This injury can be healed via a DC 15 heal check taken as a full round action that provokes, or by application of magical healing AFTER the character has been healed above 0 HP. A character suffering this Injury cannot stabilize on their own. An additional heal check must be made to stabilize the character after the bleed damage has been stopped.
12-13:
14-15:
16-17:
18: Lasting Wound- The Character takes -1 to all rolls for X days, where X is the number of hit points below 0 the triggering attack reduced them to when they suffered this injury. (minimum of 1 day)
19: aching pain- The character takes a -1 to all rolls until they finish a long rest.
20: No adverse effect
Major Injury roll/death Injury-
When a character would normally be killed, roll on the following chart. Add your con modifier to the result, then subtract the total by which your negative HP exceeded your Constitution score then consult the chart.
Roll a d12.
1-2: Death (If rolling from a Minor Injury result, reroll this result?)
3: Left Arm is severed. (May be cured via Regenerate, miracle, or wish spell. Or replaced with "Bionics.")
4: Right Arm is severed. (May be cured via Regenerate, miracle, or wish spell. Or replaced with "Bionics.")
5: Chest Wound
6: Left Leg is severed (knee down) (May be cured via Regenerate, miracle, or wish spell. Or replaced with "Bionics.")
7: Right leg is severed (knee down) (May be cured via Regenerate, miracle, or wish spell. Or replaced with "Bionics.")
8: Left Hand is severed (May be cured via Regenerate, miracle, or wish spell. Or replaced with "Bionics.")
9: Right Hand is severed (May be cured via Regenerate, miracle, or wish spell. Or replaced with "Bionics.")
10: Mental injury (example: a new Phobia, if “killed” by a giant spider, the character must succeed a (hard) will save or be terrified. (new saving throw at end of every round?)
11: Mental Injury/head injury
12: Terrible Wound- reduce maximum HP by 1 per HD. Constitution counts as 1 lower for determining when a character dies for each terrible wound a character has. Subtract X from any future Major Injury rolls where X is the number of Terrible Wounds a character has. Terrible Wounds may be healed via Heal spells on a 1 to 1 basis or a Regenerate spell.
general questions-
do you think it would be better to make the Major Injury chart a d20, and use ranges in place of straight numbered results (such as, 4-5 Left arm)
Do you think it would be better to have the minor Injury roll modified by Constitution modifier and total negative HP as I did for the Major Injuries? Or would you prefer the unmodified roll?
Do you think it would be a good idea to allow the Endurance feat's bonus to apply to minor Injury rolls?
Do you think the Diehard feat should affect the Major Injury roll? Give a Reroll on a "death" result perhaps?
Have you seen Warhammer fantasy rp? They’re rules seem to be right up your alley for when it comes to criticals and the like
I kinda don't really like the injury rules much either. I think injuries make thematic sense, but at the same time the entire system is a net negative to us with little to no advantages. (I don't like looking at things just from that angle but its worth calling out that enemies are not really affected by this).
I'm a little bit worried because I'm basically playing a melee wizard (which isn't really optimal but hey) with d6 health die and this rule makes those tactics a bit more risky for me since I'll never have the HP of a fighter, paladin, or barbarian. I'm kinda incentivized to stay away from melee combat under those rules and play a more traditional wizard (which would require a bit of a character rewrite) which is sort of the opposite of Rena's concept and design.
It also provides just a little more incentive to keep people from risking that drop.
I wanted to highlight his point, because its my biggest worry with the above injury system - it doesn't take into consideration critical hits which cannot really be prepared for, but are devastating when you add permanent injuries into the mix. I might be feeling fine or confident on 50% HP but if I get hit with a crit - suddenly I'm risking a permanent injury. Its not like I have been deliberately risky in the above scenario but I'm permanently inconvenienced by a bad dice roll.
I know that Regenerate will fix the job, but its going to be tough going from now until Level 13 until we get easy access to the spell. No doubt NPC's will be around to cast the spell for us until then, or bionics available to purchase, but big picture, its still going to hurt as its a substantial WBL penalty either you (or your party) is paying after an unlikely dice roll. I also feel like it almost incentives a passive, risk adverse playstyle which isn't always to everyone's taste.
So in that respect, I kinda share Adam's concerns, even though I totally get what you are trying to achieve with the injury system. Like Adam I'll be fine with whatever you decide, but I just thought I'd outline my own perspective on the topic.
If you do want to push forward on the injury rules though GM, you probably need to relook at the Pierced lung condition because that is brutal. If I get crit for 40 HP (easily within the bounds of possibility since its 'damage from triggering attack) then its a DC 50 Heal check or access to Regenerate (which has a 3 round casting time) to fix. There is a chance a PC outright dies even with Regenerate access due to the spells casting time.
EDIT
Whoops I didn't mean to make it this long :(
|
|
Yes, that is why I was unsure about how to go about setting the DC, how realistic I wanted to go, etc.
On one hand, I'm trying to make most "minor injuries" curable without magical aid. Some of the worse ones (1-5) are not. I should have mentioned this, (and thought I did) But I was considering having it work as follows-
If you would "die" due to a minor injury (such as pierced lung) you would roll on the Major injury table. However as I've been looking over it on my day off, I'm thinking you are right, and it should likely be moved to the Major injury chart. Especially if I leave it as it is.
The Idea behind my revamp of this was to actually make PCs a bit more durable. Say you have 20hp, and a 14 con. That's 35 damage until you are dead. You get crit with a greataxe and they slap you for 40 damage.
that's 5 points over dead. However with the injury system, you would make a roll on the Major Injury table. Lets say you roll a 7. You add your con mod, bringing it up to a 9, but then lower that by the 5 points of damage that surpassed your "dead" HP level. You now are at a 4. So, Instead of dying, you would instead lose your arm. (And be out of combat for the remainder of it). All in all, a much better outcome for you. Even at mid levels. The more I think, the more I find I do want to change the major injury roll to a d20 as well.
I'm going to tweak it a bit more, especially once I get everyone's input on it. And, if players are still hesitant I'll scrap it entirely and use it in a later game.
@Sir Ardan, no I have not, I know of the game, but I've never had the chance to play it.
I am not a fan of such a high risk of severe injuries.
Minor curable injuries with slight penalties ensuing, i am fine with.
Missing half of my limbs and an eye on a bad day, good heavens no thank you. :)
Thats a really good point GM, and not something I had considered. There are two further points though that I'll make on it.
Firstly, you stated that your intent behind the injury rules is to provide a little more incentive to keep people from risking that drop (negative hp). The trouble is, you actually end up with the reverse with these rules. Picture the situation where I'm on 1 HP (or very very low HP). Under the injury rules, I'm actually incentivized to keep fighting, because I might be able to tank a hit that would otherwise kill me. Under non injury rules, I'm basically guaranteed to die and therefore I'm encouraged to back off.
It gets trickier though if I'm on higher HP, because I'm actually incentivized to play more passive. If my HP falls into that sweet spot of 'dying' but not 'dead' (eg -1 hp) I'm possibly severely crippled but I don't get that durability swing because I'm not at risk of 'death', but I am at risk of 'dying'. Under non injury rules though, I'm 'fine' in that a quick cure spell brings me back up. So the injury rule ends up being rather 'swingy' in that the lower my HP the more the risk pays off, whereas its more punishing the higher my HP is because some of these minor condition results (such as punctured lung or rolling on the major injury table) are pretty brutal.
Secondly (and finally), for better or worse your major conditions are actually harder for players to remove than the 'dead' condition. Regenerate is a 7th level spell for Clerics, and a 9th level spell for Druids. Raise Dead (or Breath of Life) are 5th level (iirc). Resurrection is 7th level. Ironically, I'm probably happier if I roll a 1 or a 2 on the major injury table since its easier to fix than losing a limb!
If you want my overall perspective, I think your (current) injury rules work better at a higher level (where the durability rule comes into play a little more with the higher overall damage rolls) but is more brutal / punishing at low levels (where you might fall into the dying category more often but be at less risk of death due to lower overall damage rolls). Its also much harder to fix permanent injuries at low levels and is overall more punishing.
Having read through all the concerns, I'd like to shift my position from one of full steam ahead to leaning towards no in relation to the injury system, the potential of losing complete functionality of a character is not everyone's cup of tea, and I can respect that.
--
Also, a year and a half! That could be a really long time, depending on how many people are in our year; we might be at least tangentially familiar with almost everyone
Just because it is fun to talk about. I've long thought that starfinder pretty much got it right with HP and Stamina. "Hit Points (HP) measure how robust and healthy you are—a reduction in Hit Points represents physical wounds, illness, or another serious physical impairment. Stamina Points (SP), by contrast, measure your readiness and energy, and they replenish more quickly and easily...You replenish your Stamina Points by spending 1 Resolve Point and taking 10 uninterrupted minutes to rest and catch your breath. Up to once per day, you can regain some Hit Points and all of your Stamina Points after 8 full hours of uninterrupted rest, but you can also regain them through the use of magic."
In a Pathfinder setting it would look like this:
Resolve: 1/2 class level, rounding up + Con modifier
Stamina: Class + FCB
HP: Con + Toughness
So in Sir Ardan's case, he would have: 5 resolve, 9 Stamina and 4 HP.
All damage goes to stamina first. If you take HP damage then you are wounded, and *that* is when injuries come into play. 75%+ HP = lightly wounded, no penalty. 50-75% HP = wounded, -2 STR. 25-50% HP = heavily wounded, -2 STR -2 Dex. Below 25% critically wounded, -4 Str and -4 Dex, speed halved.
Penalties for being wounded vanish once character has been healed above that level of injury.
------------------------------------------------
The effect that this has? When you have full stamina, being in combat isn't that scary. Because you can spend 10 minutes catching your breath and be back on your feet without spending any resources. Nice! But once you lose your stamina, fighting becomes dangerous. And the wounded penalties could represent nearly anything. From a broken hand, to a lost eye, to a dislocated shoulder.
The system is a boon for players...as you can heal stamina *very* easily. No more carrying around multiple wands of cure light wounds as a necessity! It is also a detriment, as once you lose that stamina you face actual injury. I personally see it as being a much more realistic system than "I fight at 100% capacity until I'm at 0 wounds"
I've had some experience playing with the pathfinder wounds and vigor system before, and the experience was mixed. Never had a chance to actually play Starfinder before last week, so I'm still getting used to it. If we're going to be using radically different HP forms, I'd just like to know in advance before we actually cement that I spent two traits, a feat a free skill focus, and a class feature on being good at mundane healing, but I feel it's an essential enough part of the character that even if it's not optimal, I'll stick with it.
For the record I'm just chatting. :)
I think that it would be best to just get started being knightly and have the campaign move on. Huge changes to basic rules would change the way most people see character creation.
Wow, that wasn't a lengthy read through to catch up on all the debate regarding the injury system. Rorek, have you played it all with the Critical Deck that came out from Paizo's GameMastery line at the beginning of Pathfinder? They've been a fixture in my gaming group's table for over a decade, and add a lot of flavor, most notably with injuries and such. Obviously a deck of cards isn't functional in a PbP, but perhaps they have it in a list/rolled format. It also lends to the durability, making some criticals not multiply damage, but instead have an "injury effect" of some sort. There is a matching Fumble Deck which has also lead to some entertaining stories...
@Sir Ardan: Funny that you mention the HP/SP from Starfinder because GURPS has a similar thing with Hit Points and Fatigue points, though you can still have all your FP and still lose HP since they are different things mechanically.
Now, off to try drawing something and read through everyone's background.
Whoops. Knew there was something I was forgetting.
Okay, gear bought. Backgrounds read. Profile updated.
I think Sir Terrel is the PC Sprig would have gotten to know the best, even if it was only because she was following him to his painting spots when she could. I guess it's up to Sir Terrel if he ever caught her or not. She'd know the names of everyone else, I think, but not much about them.
Beyond that, she might know Rena and Catherine since, at least I'm assuming that, the dorms/barracks would have been separated based on sex. She would have had more opportunities to run into them.
Sorry, I know it's not much, but Sprig's friendly, not outgoing. Kinda makes it hard to figure out if she would have gotten to know any of ya without going into what happened over the year and a half we've known each other.
Oh he definitely wouldn't have noticed, he's kind of oblivious. I intentionally made perception and sense motive his blind spot. :) That being said, I'd love for Sprig and Terrel to be friendly, they're both amiable but a little socially awkward.
===
In other regards, does anyone use a deep crit weapon? It's the kind of thing that might be good to know before we go into a "dungeon" of sorts.
I imagine Catherine would be acquainted with Sir Ardan, both at the ranged practice.
And as Sprig said, the girls could easily know each other through the dorm system.
Will get my final inventory sorted tonight. Week's been busy.
@ Sir Terrel, i assume you mean crit modifier, instead of crit range?
If so, pistols have x4, nat 20.
Yeah, sorry. I use wide crit to describe scimitars, and deep crit to describe greataxes. The reason I ask is because I'm using Butterfly Sting and if there's no one who can take advantage of it, I might re-spec before we actually get into the meat and potatos of the game.
I can see Terrel and Sprig becoming close as they get to know each other more. She's going to almost die of embarrassment when he finds out about her tailing him to watch him paint. (I'm sure Elizabeth, if no one else, would happily spill the beans.)
As far as how well Sprig knows Catherine and Rena, I guess it'd be well enough to have tagged Catherine with a nickname. Maybe she got caught sneaking back in one night, maybe when she got roped into something by Elizabeth.
Kinda jumped the gun there. :D
Just asking, but is everyone, GM included, alright with romantic relationships between characters? I just wanted to ask before making anyone uncomfortable before it happens.
Vale likely knows most people, and is on good terms with them, though is not one to seek attention. He is likely the friendly guy that everyone knows, yet no one is super close to (yet, anyway). He is likely closest to Ardan, their fey-influenced ancestry being a source of connection. If Terrel has done any aid work at the various missions supported by the High Priestess of the order, then it is likely he and Vale are more closely acquainted as well.
Yeah, Terrel would have volunteered his services as a medic there. His specialties are surgery, but since heal is blanket, he really can help anyone who's sick or has a treatable injury, and he would have been interested in doing that.
Got it.