Kirth, here is what I have so far on a change from Shelyn.
Reiaerg Shadowgold was part of one patrol to eliminate or drive off the Hill Giants. With her allies down and most of the Orcs down, Reiaerg called on Torag to guide her hand and picked up a Glaive. She struck the Giant in the lower torso. A she struck, a lightning bolt struck the Giants’ raised club, traveling through the club, the Giant, the Glaive, and Reiaerg to ground. Reiaerg and the Giant fall dead.
The Dwarves rout the Orcs. After the battle, fallen Dwarves are carried inside prepared for internment with honor. Reiaerg is laid in state in Torag’s Chapel. The day of her internment when the Priests’ entered the Chapel they saw her armor on the bier, but no body. The High Priest is summoned. As he enters, Reiaerg appears beside the bier and explains that Torag has granted her responsibility over the concerns of Air, Strength, Protection, and Healing. She is wearing Scale Mail, carrying a Glaive, and wearing a symbol with a Lightning Bolt on it.
EDIT: BTW she is NG. If you have to have an alignment.
Kirth, here is what I have so far on a change from Shelyn.
Love it! Awesome mythology, good backstory that even fits nicely with campaign history (assume that "war to end wars" is the name dwarves of the Elder Mountains use for the long series of conflicts with orcs, giants, and trolls that the elves more succinctly called the "Troll Wars," and I could even pin down a date). Since I intentionally hadn't messed with dwarven gods, using Torag doesn't contradict any of the setting history. In short, consider this an enthusiastic green light. A new goddess is born!
I tried to tie it into what I knew about your setting. Evidently I succeeded in my attempt. As you can probably tell I based the Chief God from Golarion. That doesn't mean we need to use all of them for the Dwarven Gods.
I tried to tie it into what I knew about your setting. Evidently I succeeded in my attempt. As you can probably tell I based the Chief God from Golarion. That doesn't mean we need to use all of them for the Dwarven Gods.
I'd never had any details on dwarven gods at all, and Torag seems like an great fit. If others do, OK; if not, no big deal. Your new goddess indeed seems like a good fit for the setting. In fact, I might appoint you developer of the dwarven religion, and give you free reign (subject to group vote) over that aspect of the campaign world. Like, to hill dwarves worship the same gods, or their own, since they consider themselves a totally separate race? I currently have no answers for that sort of thing.
|
Kirth, here is what I have so far on a change from Shelyn.
** spoiler omitted **
EDIT: BTW she is NG. If you have to have an alignment.
I don't have an alignment.
Well, vaguely "Chaotic - whatever suits my mood and the situation" I suppose. But I don't go around kicking puppies or anything...
But, having said that, the blond is TOAST.
:)
|
|
God, how hard is it to be chaotic...err....lead sheet... in this world?Think of Aviona as having a minor planar trait: Chaotic. The sky is even a different color from in the human lands. You're in Pharisee country now, boy! The only thing is that you happened upon the three most unlikely travelling companions: two members of a fundamentally stodgy and tradition-bound race, and a displaced "human-trapped-in-an-elf's-body."
P.S. Avionans dislike overtly evil acts because they don't like it when more powerful people than themselves take them as a dueling challenge and kill them for it. Once you become one of those "more powerful" people, it gets a bit easier...
Oh, I know. I'm just wondering if buying a silver dueling dagger is bad form ;)
Oh, I know. I'm just wondering if buying a silver dueling dagger is bad form ;)
You don't already have one? Ah, yes, the high Cha. You've lived to adulthood by nicely gauging how much you can get away with without carnage erupting.
|
Oh, I know. I'm just wondering if buying a silver dueling dagger is bad form ;)You don't already have one? Ah, yes, the high Cha. You've lived to adulthood by nicely gauging how much you can get away with without carnage erupting.
He's Vlad, only with slightly less rage and bitterness. :D And no cool jhereg familiar.
He's Vlad, only with slightly less rage and bitterness. :D And no cool jhereg familiar.
And no witchcraft, noble title, Noish-pa, link to the Orb, sorcery, or proto-Great Weapon, either.
But he's better-looking, and gets all the girls -- except for the two he's travelling with!|
|
He's Vlad, only with slightly less rage and bitterness. :D And no cool jhereg familiar.And no witchcraft, noble title, Noish-pa, link to the Orb, sorcery, or proto-Great Weapon, either.
But he's better-looking, and gets all the girls -- except for the two he's travelling with!
Blah, blah blah. He's low level. Give him time to pick up all the cool stuff. As for the women...I think "getting" one of them will mean killing her. Which is, again, like Vlad, except he's not getting paid. :D
|
|
He's Vlad, only with slightly less rage and bitterness. :D And no cool jhereg familiar.Oh, I know. I'm just wondering if buying a silver dueling dagger is bad form ;)You don't already have one? Ah, yes, the high Cha. You've lived to adulthood by nicely gauging how much you can get away with without carnage erupting.
Well, and no level adjustment, either...
And wouldn't Vlad be lawful ev...err...lead shield....
;)
|
|
He's Vlad, only with slightly less rage and bitterness. :D And no cool jhereg familiar.And no witchcraft, noble title, Noish-pa, link to the Orb, sorcery, or proto-Great Weapon, either.
But he's better-looking, and gets all the girls -- except for the two he's travelling with!
You know, that really is starting to make Cadogan doubt himself. He's wondering "Really? Only some unwashed farmers want me? What the hell is WRONG with elf chicks???".
:)
|
|
He's Vlad, only with slightly less rage and bitterness. :D And no cool jhereg familiar.Oh, I know. I'm just wondering if buying a silver dueling dagger is bad form ;)You don't already have one? Ah, yes, the high Cha. You've lived to adulthood by nicely gauging how much you can get away with without carnage erupting.Well, and no level adjustment, either...
And wouldn't Vlad be lawful ev...err...lead shield....
;)
Vlad Taltos?!?!? Lawful?!?! Ummm...really?
|
|
Vlad Taltos?!?!? Lawful?!?! Ummm...really?He's Vlad, only with slightly less rage and bitterness. :D And no cool jhereg familiar.Oh, I know. I'm just wondering if buying a silver dueling dagger is bad form ;)You don't already have one? Ah, yes, the high Cha. You've lived to adulthood by nicely gauging how much you can get away with without carnage erupting.Well, and no level adjustment, either...
And wouldn't Vlad be lawful ev...err...lead shield....
;)
I thought we were talking Vlad Tepes?
I am unfamiliar with this literary character, sorry. Thought y'all were talking about Dracula.
The author (Steve Brust) cites Alexandre Dumas, Robert Parker, and Roger Zelzany as his all-time favorite authors, so you know he's cool. Vlad Taltos lives in a nation full of "elfs" who sneer at him, so as a kid he beats them up with a lead pipe, and as an adult he kills them for money... but he ends up with elf lords for best friends at some point as well, which makes him a bit conflicted.
No worries, though -- I had developed my homebrew setting long before those books were written, so knowledge of them is not as useful as knowledge of, say, The Three Musketeers, The Eyes of the Overworld, or Three Hearts and Three Lions.
You know, that really is starting to make Cadogan doubt himself. He's wondering "Really? Only some unwashed farmers want me? What the hell is WRONG with elf chicks???".
Not for the prude; possibly in the realm of "TMI" for the setting:
Just for grins and giggles, I am looking at the Dwarven Gods from FR and thinking of using the names from Pathfinder but the portfolios and domains from FR. I'll post what I come up with here so you can see it. Question about the Hill Dwarves, did they separate from the larger community because of a schism toward religion or otherwise? What is their basic outlook toward the world at large? Are there Duergar (Deep Dwarves) in Aviona?
Just for grins and giggles, I am looking at the Dwarven Gods from FR and thinking of using the names from Pathfinder but the portfolios and domains from FR. I'll post what I come up with here so you can see it. Question about the Hill Dwarves, did they separate from the larger community because of a schism toward religion or otherwise? What is their basic outlook toward the world at large? Are there Duergar (Deep Dwarves) in Aviona?
The hill dwarves ("Maahiset" in dwarven) are believed to be a totally separate race -- if in prehistory they ever were mountain dwarves ("Dverge"), or vice versa, no one will admit it (some of the eldest mountain dwarf lorekeepers might know; certainly no one else does). The Maahiset outlook is predominantly rural: they raise sheep in the highlands, forge weapons and other metal implements, brew ale, live in long halls aboveground, roofed with sod. They deeply mistrust the chaotic elves and short-lived men; as a result, they tend to view the encroachment into the Estren Highlands as a nuisance, and many of their youths turn to banditry, with anyone other than a dwarf being fair game. The exception are the relatively small numbers who emigrated west to Aviona, settling near the city of Chambard (which quickly became the center for metallurgy in Aviona).
Maahiset religion tends to be less solemn than in the mountain dwarf culture -- instead of chanting endless hymns in an underground shrine, they drink ale in their longhouses. Do they share one or more of the same gods? That is unknown to any but dwarves.
Duergar are known to live in the underdark/darklands of "the Continent" (Greyhawk), but there seem to be none in Aviona itself.
Okay, I have my starting point. I'll try to have something by Monday at least in preliminary write up.
Here is what I have come up with so far.
Mountain Dwarves//Portfolios//Hill Dwarves
Torag//Father figure//Moradin
Folgrit//Mother figure//Berronar Truesilver
Trudd//Guardian of Dwarves//Gorm Gulthyn
Angradd//War, Bravery in Battle//Clangeddin Silverbeard
Bolka//Romantic Love, Marriage//Sharindlar
Dumathoin//Buried Wealth//Abbathor
Excerpts from the diary of the Master of the Decad, taken from his desk last night:
Rim: "It is interesting that 'he' forgot to grab his journal. There is some interesting entries in this. Perhaps we should look into some of this? Anyone up for a few rounds of 'kill the EVIL guys and gals?'"
Anyone up for a few rounds of 'kill the EVIL guys and gals?'"
Let's see, you killed one in bed, and three in the council room. That leaves 5 more, plus the Master whom you sucessfully drove off.
Rim:" I am not sure that our driving 'The Master' off was such a good idea. But at least we are still alive."
|
|
Okay, thought I had after the fact...can one sunder someone else's armor? Sheraviel had much better odds with Combat Maneuvers than with outright attacks. Could she make sunder checks against his armor to make him easier to take out? I would imagine it being like her trying to reach in and cut the leather straps holding his armor on. It'd have hardness and she'd need multiple attacks to actually "remove" it, I would guess, but would that be viable?
Oh, and thank goodness I took Weapon Finesse 2nd level or poor Sheraviel would be almost useless with the strength damage! Yikes!
Jess, that was a good choice. Glad you did. BTW, Kirth, can you send me the list I gave you of Rim's feats. I neglected to make a copy. I haven't checked what you gave me make Monday. If it was in there, just let me know.
Okay, thought I had after the fact...can one sunder someone else's armor?
I certainly think that should be possible! In fact, there's good precedent: one campaign character has a sword with a 1/day bebelith claws spell-like effect, which we've had great fun with.
The only thing we need to decide is whether to retain the 3.0 rule that in order to damage a magic weapon, armor, or shield, you need a weapon with an equal or greater enhancement bonus. Personally, I'm in favor, but not strongly so -- I'm willing to be convinced if people have good reasons why not.
P.S. Regarding your success with maneuvers, and stopping the Master at the door: remember there's a "check" maneuver (see main houserules page) that would have been exactly the thing, even if you forget to declare in advance "I'm blocking the door" or whatever. A trip attack also works nicely.
P.P.S. Declaring stuff that would otherwise be visually obvious on a battlemat is something that takes getting used to. Apologies if it made for confusing play for you... Derek and I are so used to it we sometimes forget that other people aren't. The default assumption is that nothing requiring exact square placement is in effect unless announced (notice how Derek always adds "and I try to get into flanking position" every time he moves before attacking). I'll try to extend the same courtesy: unless I tell you in advance that the bad guy has you backed against a wall, or is in the doorway, or whatever, you have every right to assume he's not -- and to call me out on it if I forget.
Jess, that was a good choice. Glad you did. BTW, Kirth, can you send me the list I gave you of Rim's feats. I neglected to make a copy.
The list you gave me is: 3. Selective Channeling; 5. Power Attack; 7. Bulwark of Defense; 9. Shorten Grip; 11. Cleave; 13. Shield Ally; 15. Stand Still (now superceded by Improved Check); 17. Lunge; 19. Multiattack.
Thanks. I thought I should have made a copy.
|
|
Okay, thought I had after the fact...can one sunder someone else's armor?I certainly think that should be possible! In fact, there's good precedent: one campaign character has a sword with a 1/day bebelith claws spell-like effect, which we've had great fun with.
The only thing we need to decide is whether to retain the 3.0 rule that in order to damage a magic weapon, armor, or shield, you need a weapon with an equal or greater enhancement bonus. Personally, I'm in favor, but not strongly so -- I'm willing to be convinced if people have good reasons why not.
I would expect it's harder to damage an item if it's magical and yours isn't - or it's more magical than yours. But I don't like the idea of it being a binary you can do it or you can't. If a commoner dons magical armor, it's shouldn't be impossible to divest him of it without killing him first. It should be significantly harder than it is with non-magical gear. I'll look up the rules tonight, see what magic does exactly. I believe it gives items a save, gives them a bonus to saves, andincreases hardness or hitpoints or both. But I wouldn't want it to be impossible. I would expect if he'd had +3 armor, it'd be next to impossible for me with my masterwork rapier, but I wouldn't want it to be absolutely impossible.
P.P.S. Declaring stuff that would otherwise be visually obvious on a battlemat is something that takes getting used to. Apologies if it made for confusing play for you... Derek and I are so used to it we sometimes forget that other people aren't. The default assumption is that nothing requiring exact square placement is in effect unless announced (notice how Derek always adds "and I try to get into flanking position" every time he moves before attacking). I'll try to extend the same courtesy: unless I tell you in advance that the bad guy has you backed against a wall, or is in the doorway, or whatever, you have every right to assume he's not -- and to call me out on it if I forget.
No, that wasn't the issue. It's that I have a hard time being heard at the table. I say things multiple times and am ignored. Or I start a sentence and get interrupted at the table...multiple times. Everyone's having fun and getting excited, but I"m trying to respect your wishes on not being too loud...and then not being heard. It's a little frustrating. Sorry I lost my temper a bit about it.
No, that wasn't the issue. It's that I have a hard time being heard at the table. I say things multiple times and am ignored. Or I start a sentence and get interrupted at the table...multiple times. Everyone's having fun and getting excited, but I"m trying to respect your wishes on not being too loud...and then not being heard. It's a little frustrating. Sorry I lost my temper a bit about it.
I noticed that happening and felt bad about it because I've been in the same situation. I'll start being more conscious of everyone's turn at the table.
I'm a bit hard of hearing to begin with, which doesn't help. Maybe Derek's hand-raising idea has some merit to it after all... but overall, I think if half the players could just STOP YELLING, then I could hear ALL the players a whole lot better. I hate to make arbitrary rules like, "anyone yelling automatically loses their turn," so hopefully people can learn to keep it down on their own.
Or maybe "anyone yelling provokes an attack of opportunity from everyone who's not" ...
I would expect it's harder to damage an item if it's magical and yours isn't - or it's more magical than yours. But I don't like the idea of it being a binary you can do it or you can't. If a commoner dons magical armor, it's shouldn't be impossible to divest him of it without killing him first. It should be significantly harder than it is with non-magical gear.
OK, Pathfinder says that each "plus" of enhancement gives +1 to hardness and +10 to hp. Since most hardnesses are either 5 or 10, I'd be more inclined to double the hardness addition -- I'd like for +5 armor to be worth the cost.
Base hp are, idiotically, based on inches of thickness of materials. Armor of course lacks a "hp" column in the table. So we're on our own for that. In addition to the enhancement bonus thing, there's also the problem that different materials have different base hardnesses and hp, which makes things confusing when combined with the whole "+3 is equivalent to cold iron" thing that's been carried over from 1e. I'll take a look at everything -- PF, 3.5, 3.0, and 1.0 -- and see if I can come up with a reasonable draft. Jess, if you wanted to look at things, too, I'd sure value the input.
|
|
I'm a bit hard of hearing to begin with, which doesn't help. Maybe Derek's hand-raising idea has some merit to it after all... but overall, I think if half the players could just STOP YELLING, then I could hear ALL the players a whole lot better. I hate to make arbitrary rules like, "anyone yelling automatically loses their turn," so hopefully people can learn to keep it down on their own.
Or maybe "anyone yelling provokes an attack of opportunity from everyone who's not" ...
You know, if you'd just be a boring DM we wouldn't get so excited...
But, yeah, the reason I would raise my hand is to let you (or the other players) know I had something to say, but not interrupt the convo going on, kind of a "when you get a chance" kind of thing.
But, yeah, the reason I would raise my hand is to let you (or the other players) know I had something to say, but not interrupt the convo going on, kind of a "when you get a chance" kind of thing.
Yeah, like I said, that might work out pretty well, if people stick to it. There's also a lot to be said for a strict "no talking ever unless it's your turn" rule, but I dislike that approach for a variety of non-gaming-related reasons. So if we could be a bit less formal about it than that -- but a LOT more quiet and polite about things in general -- I think things can work out OK. So far I feel that everyone brings a lot to the table, so I want to make sure everyone gets to contribute equally.
On my end, I'll also try to be on the lookout for nonverbal cues from the quieter people, and make an effort to be a bit less easily distracted by hyper players.
My wife suggested the following rules:
Obviously she has "upper management" written all over her!
Then again, by these standards, Andostre is already pre-cleared of two offenses over two sessions...
|
|
My wife suggested the following rules:
First yell of a session (or interruption of someone whose turn it is)... offender buys 12-pack of soda for the group next time.
Second offense - offender owes group a sixpack of GOOD beer (Bud light kills your character instantly, or gets you kicked out of the game, DM's choice).
Third offense - you'd better bring some Scotch or Cognac next week!
4th offense - you buy all game materials for the remainder of the campaign. Obviously she has "upper management" written all over her!
Then again, by these standards, Andostre is already pre-cleared of two offenses over two sessions...
But, I don't know how to distinguish good beer from bad. :(
But, I don't know how to distinguish good beer from bad.
You also do very little yelling, so it might be a moot point. In general: if it's yellow swill, mass-produced in factories, it's bad. If Alabamans and Carolinians drink it, it's bad. If it has "Lite" in the name, it's very bad.
So far I feel that everyone brings a lot to the table...
Then again, by these standards, Andostre is already pre-cleared of two offenses over two sessions...
I just made the connection, Kirth. Hear you loud and clear, buddy!
I certainly didn't mean to imply that beer was all you bring... just that it was most welcome!
"Brings something to the table" is my game dork slang for "is someone who adds to the group, instead of detracting from it." And we've all played with people of the latter sort (Roaches in the backpack? Laptopping in lieu of paying attention?).
Roaches in the backpack? Holy crap.
Roaches in the backpack? Holy crap.
One of Jess' examples: ask her about that one. I seem to recall her mentioning one crawling out of the person's laptop as well, and across the table. A self-moving rust monster miniature!
|
|
Roaches in the backpack? Holy crap.One of Jess' examples: ask her about that one. I seem to recall her mentioning one crawling out of the person's laptop as well, and across the table. A self-moving rust monster miniature!
I love to rant about this one, because it still pisses me off something horrible.
Yeah, I had a couple of players....we played two days in a row as one of the players was moving out of state, and we wanted to get to a good stopping point. So Friday night, one of the couple, who also usually paid no attention to the game as she chatted on her laptop - a cockroach crawls out of her external drive and runs across the gaming table. Disgusted, I kill it and throw it out, only to get a "That wasn't me, it must have been in your house."
My house is WHITE and BEIGE. This was in the middle of a table!!!!!!! The gall!
So, then, when we were wrapping up the second game, the player that was moving took me aside and said "You need to bug bomb your apartment. I saw a cockroach crawl out of their backpack. I killed it, but I don't know if there were more."
AUGH!
So I bug bombed my place, and didn't find any nasty roach corpses lying around. I can only hope we nipped it in the bud.
uuuuugh.
::shivers::
My apologies to the group and GM for being loud at the table. I will try adhering to Derek's idea of raising my hand when I have something to say.
OK, Pathfinder says that each "plus" of enhancement gives +1 to hardness and +10 to hp.
Accepting for the sake of argument the 1e convention that "+5 = adamantine" (which carried over into 3e: look at the 3.0 vs. 3.5 descriptions of stoneskin, for example)... well, adamantine weapons ignore hardness up to 20.
20/+5 = 4, so as a baseline, each "plus" should increase hardness by 4, rather than by 1, under that model. +10 hp per "plus" sounds reasonable. If we start at base statistics of hardess 10, 15 hp for swords, and hardness 10, 30 hp for armor, then a 1st level raging barbarian would need about 3 blows to sunder a normal suit of metal armor, using his own normal sword. Using that same plain steel sword, he needs roughly the same number of blows to sunder +1 armor at 4th level, +2 armor at 8th, +3 armor at 12th, +4 armor at 16th, and +5 armor at 20th (math spreadsheet available upon request) -- it doesn't get any harder for him to sunder level-appropriate magic armor using a nonmagic weapon, in other words, because of his scaling damage output. Using any kind of a magic weapon, even a comparatively wimpy one, sundering gets easier and easier.Question 1: Is that still too easy? I mean, a 12th level barbarian can easily sunder +2 armor (for example) using a normal, non-enhanced weapon. Or he can sunder +4 armor in a couple of blows using a +1 weapon.
Question 2: As a geologist, "hardness" has a specific definition that has to do with scratching/resistance to being scratched (and it is pretty much binary: harder substances can scratch softer ones, and cannot be in turn scratched by them). It has nothing to do with resistance to breakage or fracturing. Therefore, using the term to describe damage reduction sort of grates on me. Is that too anal? Or does it make sense to everyone to say that steel has "DR 10/-" instead of saying it has "hardness 10" (especially because plain steel has Mohs hardness 4.5, ranging to 7.5 for hardened steel)?
|
|
20/+5 = 4, so as a baseline, each "plus" should increase hardness by 4, rather than by 1, under that model.
I like this approach. Consistent, and a little better, I think, than the current Pathfinder rules. You still have to hit the CMB - one worry (just thinking out loud, I do like the idea!) - will the lower dex and dodgy type bonuses of heavy armor wearers make this too easy?
Question 1: Is that still too easy? I mean, a 12th level barbarian can easily sunder +2 armor (for example) using a normal, non-enhanced weapon. Or he can sunder +4 armor in a couple of blows using a +1 weapon.
Consider, though, that you're not doing damage to the guy in the armor. You're hacking up his gold filigreed plate. So while you're spending a couple of rounds shucking him out of his armor, he's either doing the same to you, or chopping at you. Also, unless you're investing the feats, it provokes an attack of opportunity. A character that invested heavily in sundering armor should be generally balanced against a character heavily invested in fighting in armor and protecting it. If they don't balance out, there's an issue. I'll try to look at some numbers tonight.
Question 2: As a geologist, "hardness" has a specific definition...Therefore, using the term to describe damage reduction sort of grates on me...does it make sense to everyone to say that steel has "DR 10/-" instead of saying it has "hardness 10"...?
While this has never bothered me to a significant degree, it is the introduction of needless extra terminology - unless there's some other difference between hardness and damage reduction that I am unaware of.