joe walmsley's page

Lurkane - Sentient Shadows of rogues killed in trials of ascendance to demigodhood. Quite dangerous undead creatures.

Counterclawfing

I'm late to the party for an ongoing Jade Regent game. I'm wanting to play a Sorcerer or maybe Wizard (the party has none!). They are currently 4th level and just finished a part regarding a burning boat. The DM has informed me that I can join into the party very soon as a "bystander who got involved" during a very public combat.

Now that you know the placement background, we are allowed a 20 point buy, and I prefer to play non-blaster type spellcasters. I'm thinking more control and buff. Mostly I want my character to survive on his own since my character will be excluded from the major source of emergency campaign healing. I'd be interested in Half Orc but will play other options if that would not work out. HPs and Con seem important to survive the multiple sneak attacks which are happening in this game. I do not want to be a melee caster. I love having loads of skills.

Fellow players have asked that I be able to handle invisible and hiding monsters.

What suggestions do you folks have for me?

Wraithstrike: Wow. That is buried. Thank you for finding it.

Gisher: Hm... I knew something like this would come up.

So... do we need a FAQ on this?

I'm not sure we have need of an FAQ here. Why is this coming up? Is there a wording somewhere that is trying to be twisted into something that would not make sense to create a loophole? Please clarify the situation as it is presenting.

Seppuku wrote:

I think the better point of this is that we are playing a cooperative storytelling game.

I am right there with you so far Seppuku.

Seppuku wrote:

The DM is setting a framework and everyone else gets to play in the playground the DM creates.

Oops... now we are starting to diverge, at least as I am understanding what you are saying. I am with you up through "the DM is setting a framework..." but when you get to "everyone else gets to play in the playground" I start looking for where you started to diverge from my view of things. Just the term "gets to play" already implies some sort of GM benevolence that the player should be grateful for. And I don't see that at all. It's a group of people playing together as I see it. The GM "gets to play" just as much as anyone else in the room. And then you get to "the DM creates." But just above that you said it was a "cooperative story" but now it's one the "GM creates?" Nope I don't see it that way. The endeavor is one which the GM and players create together. Without a GM, the players can't play, but without players the GM can't GM. There is this constant expression on these boards that somehow the GM is more important than the players, and I simply don't agree with that. The GM is in a different role. It is a role that has more effort behind it, and by design more authority, but as Spiderman is fond of saying, "with great power comes great responsibility." I seem to see a lot of comments about the power of the GM, but not so much about their responsibility.

Seppuku wrote:

There is some structure and some vision that the DM is trying to create for everyone.

Again, the GM and players create it together. If the GM is running to some secret script that is revealed as the GM decrees to the players, that's a problem. The players should be plugged into what the GM is trying to do, at least at a level where the players can decide if that's the sort of game they actually want to play. This is why...

I'm not going to be as creative in layout as you were. Deal...

If you don't get it then I think that is intentional, but I'm not sure based on what you wrote. That's fine. If I'm designing a game world and it's a gritty space marine game, don't expect the me (or any GM) to bend over backwards to allow My Little Pony characters. If you want to play My Little Pony, perhaps my game isn't for you this time. If you want to run your own My Little Pony game, I'm not going to want to do that. You can run it by the group to see if anyone else wants to try it. I'll pass, but others might not. If I'm running a world where teleporting does not work, whining to me about wanting to play a teleporting character is not going to make the game experience better. Some DMs like to play a sandbox game (or at least claim to) where the players can do whatever they want. I'm not that guy. I have a campaign in mind with some story arcs I intend to run. Sabotaging the game and refusing to play this non-open ended campaign is going to end the game, not get this DM to change the world to be My Little Ponies. We, as a group, will choose to do something else.

I expect the players to participate and be into the spirit of the game they are playing, not trying to morph it into something else. This applies to classes on characters. If it belongs in the world and a PC can play it, work with the DM to make it work for your character. If you aren't creative enough to think of why your character would do something or pick a class level, be open to having that created into the story for you. If it doesn't fit the story or the type of campaign the GM is running, don't whine about it in hopes that everyone else will cave in to shut you up.

It says as a move action you can concentrate, not as a move action you can present a holy symbol and chant. That said, it detects auras of evil, which require cleric levels or evil extra planar or fiendish etc for them to register. Being a bad man or a merchant who cheats everyone or a rogue who robs houses and murders the occupants or being a necromancer does not detect as evil. You must have an aura.

Of course it is possible. Beat on it with a large, blunt, magical staff. May the dice fall ever in your favor.

Granted, each of those have their own caveats. Alter self is useless against true seeing, for example, whereas mundane disguises are not.

Awesome. I'm a person suspended in a large worm with tentacles.....

Playing a campaign of RHoD where the DM improvises and goes away from the module a LOT.

The party is going from the river town, which has just been over-run, and is moving ahead of the fleeing populace to warn the other towns along the road. The party comes into some rolling hills. Looking up a sunny exposure of hillside the party notices some bright green folliage which doesn't match the surroundings. It seems to be a cultivated crop which is very unusual so far away from any town. The ranger moves to investigate and finds a vast crop of smokable hemp. Before he gets too close, he hears a voice from somewhere further up the hill, "Don't come no closer or I'll feather ya." The conversation continues and the party negotiates to purchase almost all of the field (making odd plans to lite it in front of the advancing horde to hopefully slow them down). With no violence forthcoming, a Gnoll in a gilly suit and carrying a repeating crossbow pops up out of the field, proceeds to collect his payment and takes a few choice plants for his personal use and then walks off down the road leaving the party with their newly purchased pot farm.

Says the DM: "You have avoided taking two sniper shots from the grassy gnoll...."

I'd have to say that I'm in the 6.6 to 6.9 range as a DM. There has to be an overall storyline and purpose to my games. Having the players show up at the table and indicate that my world and word be damned and they are going to play something else that I am going to run on the fly without any prep time seems like a bizarre time waste. Having players help me with mechanics when we collectively get stuck is fine. Having them rewrite my NPCs and tell me how to run them isn't going to work for me. The game is co-operative, but without a DM providing conflict and challenges for the players, you might as well be playing angry Barbies.

How about drow who burrowed their homes out of a giant hanging stalagtite? Something (like an earthquake)ccaused the city to fall to the cavern floor, where it shattered. You could have all sorts of off kilter room and broken hallways which throw dimensions off for travel and combats inside. The Drow left because they could not reattach their home to the ceiling of the cavern. They went elsewhere to rebuild.

DMs sink a lot of time and money into a quality game. Players, not so much. Their prep time is the drive to my house and sometimes looking for the latest way to optimize their character. As the group DM, I just bought another Pathfinder book tonight. I have more Pathfinder books than the entire rest of my 7 player group combined. I also have the entire 3.5 collection, the core of 4.0, most of 3.0, everything I could get my hands on 2e plus older stuff. Modules, magazine subscriptions, thousands of minis. I provide the place to play every week. I have purchased specially designed furniture and wall mounted dry erase boards for my dedicated gaming room. I do not provide food or beverages. My players pay me in food/snack during game play. (They call this DM bribery) Being a DM is a fun way to go broke, not make a living.

kmal2t wrote:

Ok...

How does a person know they sucked at hearing unless they know they should be hearing something? That's pretty weak. Rechecking bad perception rolls is just metagaming.

IRL, how do I know I did poorly at a job interview even before I get a rejection letter? But amazingly enough, I do.

Ok, that was funny.

How do you know you did poorly before you get the rejection letter? You made your perception check....

Perhaps good is for cowards and the unmotivated?

Good is for anti-capitalists.

Evil is for those who are self starters and driven to always improve themselves.