SJ@'s 4Experience

[SJ@]

Ragadolf wrote:

Ben will go in B or D 16, back -to-the-wall kind of thing. ;)

Oh, I forgot to mention on the other thread,...
Welcome Back Sant@!

Thanks! Good to be back. My wife and I are still in re-entry mode, but everyone--the two boys included--made it back relatively unscathed. Relatively.

To-dos whilst we await NSpicer's return:

1. I'll get the map updated to the "ready-to-rumble" state that it ought to be in.

2. I'll actually RE-review your character sheets now that they are solid so as to be better acquainted with the unusual suspects on the other side of the table.

3. Now for you...pretend that it's Christmas for your characters, and send me a wish list (most of you refer to me as Sant@ anyway!). Specifically, I want a magic items n' loot wish list...well, just items actually: 3-to-5 items, no more than 4th level. Think like a DM. Think, "Oooh, this'd be really cool for [insert your character's name here] to have." I'll use the list as a starting-point for loot-like considerations. And I do mean a starting point, so don't expect to get everything you want. Once I do #2, above, I ought to be able to say, "Ooooh, that would be cool for [insert your character's name here] to have."

[SJ@]

Updated Map.

As Ben sits at your table, Andronsius and his assistant, Hess, collect their coin and make there way out the back door.

EDIT: Oops! Now posted to game thread.

[JSL]

I just noticed WotC posted character backgrounds (similar to PF campaign traits) for the AP. Can we choose one? If so, I'd like Dravos to have Traveling Missionary, which grants an extra language (I'm thinking Draconic), Religion as a class skill (I will be training it via the Cleric Initiate feat, though, not as one of my starting skills), and +2 on Religion, which saves me having to take Skill Focus to get a decent check modifier.

[SJ@]

JSL wrote:

I just noticed WotC posted character backgrounds (similar to PF campaign traits) for the AP. Can we choose one? If so, I'd like Dravos to have Traveling Missionary, which grants an extra language (I'm thinking Draconic), Religion as a class skill (I will be training it via the Cleric Initiate feat, though, not as one of my starting skills), and +2 on Religion, which saves me having to take Skill Focus to get a decent check modifier.

Yes. I just took a quick look at the article--they all look fine to me. I suppose Ben will be taking "Detective," eh? If you'd like a character background, please choose one soon and finalize your character sheet. Have a good holiday, all. See you on Tuesday.

[Dreamer]

JSL wrote:

I just noticed WotC posted character backgrounds (similar to PF campaign traits) for the AP...

I just had time to skim the article, but I might look at their options for elves/rangers. I've had a hard time coming up with a good "hook" for Aelwyn, and this might be the jumping-off point I need.

[FabesMinis]

Auspicious Birth is appropriate for Kriv.

[JSL]

I have updated Dravos to reflect the Traveling Missionary Background.

Also, next week will be really busy for me. I am at meetings (out of the office) all day Tuesday and Wednesday. Since my wife works those nights, I have to take care of the kids when I get home. So I won't be able to post until late in the evening (if at all) until Thursday.

[Neil Spicer]

SJ@ wrote:

...If you'd like a character background, please choose one soon and finalize your character sheet.

The following look like good ones for Ceelie...

-- Merchant Prince (learn an extra language...Goblinoid? Orc?...whatever humanoids threaten Brindol the most; plus a +2 bonus on Insight checks)

-- Wandering Mercenary (it takes 4 failed death saves to kill her)

-- Gritty Sergeant (proficiency in a military weapon...bigger sword?...plus a +1 bonus on Initiative checks could help with combat advantage opportunities)

-- Con Artist (grants a +1 bonus to two skills Ceelie already has...i.e., Bluff and Thievery)

-- Cat Burglar (the theme fits, but grants only a +1 bonus to Athletics and Thievery skill checks)

-- Born Under A Bad Sign (substituting highest Ability Score...Dex for Con...to determine starting Hit Points, might make Ceelie a tougher melee combatant)

Any suggestions from the 4experts on which seems most plausible/effective for Ceelie to take?

--Neil

[Dreamer]

One thing I'm noticing with 4e characters/classes is that seem pretty strictly tracked. Once you pick a race and one of the three (fairly stereotypical) classes that go with that race, the rules pretty much determine everything else you're going to do. I kind of like more choices than that -- or at least more decision points. In creating Aelwyn, after choosing race and class, I got to choose ranged or melee fighting style. And the rest kind of determined itself.

Even with these backgrounds (which are helpful, don't get me wrong) since I'm playing an elf ranger (and a youngish one at that), I'm kind of limited to the Hunter track or the Forest Warden track -- and I don't see a huge difference between them.

Nothing special. *sigh*

Someday, I think it would be fun to play an assassin.

[Celia "Ceelie" Merveaux]

Dreamer wrote:

Someday, I think it would be fun to play an assassin.

"Did someone call?"

[Aelwyn]

Celia 'Ceelie' Merveaux wrote:

Dreamer wrote:

Someday, I think it would be fun to play an assassin.

"Did someone call?"

Go ahead, rub it in. ;)

[Neil Spicer]

Actually, I share your opinion about less variety and removing choice from the player. The 4e mechanics are optimized to pretty much steer your character down a certain path once you make a few choices. It's not at all unlike some of the CRPGs (computer roleplaying games) where you have to focus on building your character down a certain path, because if you step off it, you'll jeopardize your chances of staying on equal footing with the challenges of the game itself.

Of course, 4e is also promoting the importance of teamwork by making several abilities and powers more cooperative in nature. These serve to reinforce a particular class role while making sure the game isn't just about optimized loners who happen to be in the same game together. It'll be interesting to see how well that plays out with something like Ceelie's Wolfpack Tactics ability, etc. And ultimately, that's why we playtest...both to see how the game works and to form an opinion around how much that satisfies the overall gaming itch.

--Neil

[FabesMinis]

Don't forget re-training, paragon paths, and multi-classing.

[Ragadolf]

Haven't read that article yet, but 'Detective' sounds like a good one for Ben!

Please see JSL's thread for my comments on my current situation. I'll catch up ASAP, sorry! (But it's not my fault! Really! The Hurricane ate my homework!)

Laters!

[JSL]

NSpicer wrote:

Actually, I share your opinion about less variety and removing choice from the player.

This is true. Although in computer programming terms, one would say that 4e is more "strongly classed" than 3e, which is more "mutable".

That is to say, each 4e class is designed around a particular concept and executes that concept better than any other class.

In fact it is sort of unusual that the ranger is still broken into the bow/two-weapon paths. There seems to me little need to keep these two specialities in the same class. Because of this, the ranger is slightly disadvantaged in their number of choices at some levels - though I suspect this will be resolved with future supplements.

However, I do think they could have made two different classes: Archer and Two-weapon Dude.

On the other hand, in order to make the classes more generic, some fluff from previous editions (such as the ranger's association with nature) has been toned down.

Now a ranger does not have to be a "lone defender of the wilderness", but could also be a soldier trained in archery, an urban bounty hunter, an explorer (Dungeoneering is a class skill), a swashbuckler (two-weapon fighting), a ninja (again with the two weapons), even a samurai (two weapons and/or bow).

So, what does the ranger do better than the other classes?

In short, they will roll more attacks than other strikers (rogues and warlocks) and they have higher base damage then rogues. So, while they lack the high single-target damage of rogues and don't apply conditions like warlocks, they will reliably dish out a fair share of damage and can do it without putting themselves at as much risk.

They get multiple attacks against the same foe. This can do alot of damage, but generally they have to hit with two or more attack rolls to do it. So it is a high variance, high reward approach, but it also means that they are more likely to at least do something with their attack - getting a partial result is better than a complete miss.

They have more offensive interrupts than other classes. Try to attack a ranger - or his ally - and you could be dead before you draw your sword. Alternately, they can pile on the damage when an ally scores a hit.

They have some good defensive interrupts, including some that give them an extra attack.

They can pick the enemies out from between allies. All ranger area effect powers target only enemies. They also can target multiple specific enemies at range or move in melee to attack multiple enemies. At high level, they can target all enemies in range - minion killer, anyone?

One last interesting note on the 4e ranger: you have to pick ranged or two-weapon fighting at first level. However, these are not specifically requirements to use powers. The power requirements are only that you be armed with a ranged weapon or armed with two weapons. Therefore, the 4e ranger can actually switch between the two combat styles!

Whether that makes sense is another matter, however, as most characters will not have the budget to support three magical weapons commesurate with their character level. Nevertheless, it is interesting that the option is available.

For comparison:

In the 3e core, there are three valid ways to build an archer.

1. Fighter specializing in the longbow.
2. Ranger using the bow fighting-style.
3. Rogue armed with a shortbow.

Each has advantages and disadvantages.

The fighter has the most hit-points, the greatest accuracy, and the most damage potential (factoring in Weapon Focus and Specialization). However, he lacks any semblance of stealth, evasion, or a good reflex save. So when the enemy artillery responds to his arrow barrage, he's in a world of hurt.

The ranger has good hit-points, gets most of the nifty bow feats for free, is stealthy, has evasion, and has a good reflex save. However, the ranger also has a host of other abilities (animal companion, spells) that may not complement a player's ideal for their character. Also, it is harder to optimize the character across a broader spectrum of abilities. So if the player wants to use 4th level spells, they may be doing so at the cost of a point or two of attack bonus or damage. Conversely, if they optimize their bow use, they may do so at the expense of their higher-level ranger spells.

The rogue can drop a ton of damage with sneak attack and is even stealthier than the ranger. But, compared to the others, has the fewest hit-points, is limited to the short-bow, and is significantly less accurate.

So while 3e gives a host of choices, which is appreciated by those with the time, energy, and devotion to map them all out and figure out what they want, it also leaves the novice confused, overwhelmed, and second-guessing.

4e has removed some of that guesswork at the expense of having more options. If you want to play Hawkeye (from the Avengers, not MASH) or Robin Hood, play a ranger.

Dang, now I'm excited for rangers. Anyone want a slightly used dwarf? ;)

[Dreamer]

With Salome, I figured, "OK, they need a cleric. I'll play a cleric," also figuring it wasn't that special. It wasn't until a few rounds of combat that I could see how she would be valuable as a player. I imagine it will be similar with Aelwyn. I can't look at a stat block and say, "Oh, here's a list of advantages for this character; this is how she'll play at 5th level." Instead, it's rules and tasks, and it won't be "real" for me until I play it a bit.

However, I do find JSL's enthusiasm encouraging, and I don't think it's just to make me feel better. :)

SJ@ -- I haven't had time to pick nifty magical stuff yet. I'm glad things are going to be game-slow this week, because life is a little bit crazy right now.

[FabesMinis]

Now imagining playing Hawkeye from MASH... oh wait I already do kind of in Kayos' Age of Worms PbP.

[santinj@]

FabesMinis wrote:

Now imagining playing Hawkeye from MASH...

"Nurse? Nurse!?"

"Did you call me, Doctor?"
"Why would I call you doctor? I'm the surgeon!"

Dreamer wrote:

SJ@ -- I haven't had time to pick nifty magical stuff yet. I'm glad things are going to be game-slow this week, because life is a little bit crazy right now.

I hear you! It seems like everyone's a little jumbled lately. Hurricanes, moving, licensure, babies, job hunt...oh my! Not to mention those pesky vacations. Anyway, no hurry on the wish list. It won't come into play right away.

[Neil Spicer]

JSL wrote:

All ranger area effect powers target only enemies. They also can target multiple specific enemies at range or move in melee to attack multiple enemies. At high level, they can target all enemies in range - minion killer, anyone?

This sounds a lot like the Blinding Barrage from the Rogue's powers...which I find a little far-fetched. Targeting up to 9 opponents in a burst or cone with these kinds of powers smacks even more of the computer gaming mindset. It's kewl powers! But without a whole lot of credibility, which again, underscores the powergamey/munchkiny feel of 4e. But then, I felt 3e tweaked things in that direction vs. 2e/1e as well.

Even so, 4e seems to have cast off any intentions of even trying to showcase itself as anything more than a hack-fest. The game is still what you choose to make of it, of course. And everyone has their own playing style. I just have a harder time getting into games that make me work to try and portray that style...especially when the marketing of the game text and design elements are kind of training new gamers to favor a different style than the one I prefer to play. That's the frustrating element for a lot of the anti-4e crowd, I think.

JSL wrote:

In the 3e core, there are three valid ways to build an archer.

1. Fighter specializing in the longbow.
2. Ranger using the bow fighting-style.
3. Rogue armed with a shortbow.

Actually, I can think of many more...

4. Cleric with a couple of domains that are hunter/archery oriented where the deity's favored weapon is a bow. Tack on the Zen Archery feat and he's instantly dialed in with a higher bonus to attack (at least as good as a Rogue relying on Dexterity).

5. Wizard (diviner) using true strike a lot (admittedly will have fewer attacks, but each shot will count!). Invest in the Quicken Spell and Craft Magic Arms and Armor feats and he could easily produce a weapon capable of using true strike even more often...or simply use it as a quickened spell before every attack.

6. Sorcerer using true strike in much the same manner as above.

7. An Elven Bard relying on his singing voice to rally both his allies and himself as he takes one shot after another.

8. A variant-Barbarian from Unearthed Arcana who trades in his rage abilities for the Ranger's archery-related combat style.

9. And virtually any multi-class option that includes a dip into a few Fighter or Ranger levels (somewhere between 2 and 4 ought to work) to ensure a healthy dose of archery-related feats. For example, I could easily have done Zieke as a Fighter 2 / Monk ? and focused on archery, including the Deflect Arrows feat to make him seem particularly bow-savvy.

I just don't get the sense that 4e replicates anything like that...even with retraining, paragon paths, etc. So the reduced number of choices for how to build a certain archetype are pretty glaring. Of course, the cynic in me assumes Wizards will soon rectify that by introducing a litany of splat-books to create other classes or paths that will eventually achieve the same mechanic. But, the glaring difference is that 3e gave you most of those options straight out of the core PHB. And that's what I'm missing as a player trying to learn my way through 4e.

--Neil

[Neil Spicer]

SJ@ wrote:

3. Now for you...pretend that it's Christmas for your characters, and send me a wish list...

I don't have any particular "Christmas" list in mind for Ceelie. And I'm not even sure of the "level" the following magic items might be, but here's a few ideas:

1) A throwing dagger that magically returns...or maybe one that can make a single attack against multiple foes in a straight line when it's thrown. This type of item alone would make more sense for Ceelie being able to pull off her Blinding Barrage ability if it can boomerang or move Krull-like through a crowd before returning to her hand.

2) A defensive-minded shortsword that will help Ceelie stay in the fight when off on her own until help can arrive to once again set up combat advantage. Either something that helps her withdraw or just increases her AC vs. attacks or Reflex, Will, Fortitude-oriented powers.

3) A cloak or similar garment that enhances her Stealth somehow. Maybe something that helps her go insubstantial in order to bypass a wall or a locked door...but only in short single-movement actions as opposed to a continuous insubstantial state.

4) A charm-related item that might help her influence others...maybe a pendant or amulet of some kind.

5) An Athletics and speed enhancing item (boots maybe?) to help her on the battlefield.

That's all I've got...
--Neil

[SJ@]

NSpicer wrote:

I don't have any particular "Christmas" list in mind for Ceelie. And I'm not even sure of the "level" the following magic items might be, but here's a few ideas:

Thanks for that. I don't need specific items if you don't have the rule books. A list like NSpicer's will do just fine. I just want something to make my DMing life easier...plus it's in the AP!

[FabesMinis]

You're ok with a returning dagger - all thrown magic weapons return in 4E. :D

[SJ@]

From the game thread:

Celia 'Ceelie' Merveaux wrote:

Awww...no Streetwise? Ceelie kicks butt in that skill.

You know, I thought about that. In all honesty I was trying to make a judgement-call using the skills descriptions in the rules compendium in DDI. I was concerned that the descriptions might be truncated from ones in the rule books--turns out their not. Ultimately, I think I made the right call, but here's how I got there:

I decided (to put it in 3e terms) that this was more of a Knowledge (Local) check than a Gather Information check. To me that translated into a History check for common knowledge, and I tailored the info. in the spoiler to have a bit of a "historical" slant. Since Ben is a "local" detective-type, I gave him the trained bonus whether he was actually trained or not.

I'll look into using Streetwise in a similar manner...perhaps taking a passive check (taking 10) instead of rolling for those "instant" bits of information. In this case, I'd probably tailor the info. in the spoiler to exclude the more "historical" information that's in there.

Keep up the feedback, guys! I don't take it personally and am completely comfortable saying yes-or-no to whatever take you all come up with. It makes me delve into the rules more closely, which is the whole point of this 4experiment anyway (at least for me).

[SJ@]

From the other thread:

Celia 'Ceelie' Merveaux wrote:

Can any of us actually have a passive perception higher than 20? We'd need a +11 or better, right? And if the DC is 20, does it have to be higher than 20? I also notice Rags has Ben listed with a +11 passive perception, but I think that's a miscalculation, right? He just went ahead and added the "take 10" value. Normally, Perception is +5 for being trained, and then add your relevant ability modifier (Wis) and any special modifiers for feats, etc. So, for Ceelie, it's +6...add 10...passive Perception is 16 total. Is that correct? I'm not trying to be nitpicky or anything. I just want to better understand this aspect of 4e correctly...

It is possible that a first level character could have the necessary +10 bonus to get a passive perception of 20, though not probable. An Elf with at least a 16 Wisdom, who's a Ranger or Rogue, and is trained in Perception is most likely. The Skill Focus feat could also help in this regard.

You've got most of the mechanic, but not all of it. The skill check mechanic is: Training (if any) + Ability Modifier (if any) + One-half your character's level (rounded down). There's also the assorted armor penalties and such as they apply, but those three components make up the basic mechanic.

I'd have to look at Rag's character sheet for Ben to see, but I think he means an 11 for passive perception. Let's take a look...

Edit: Yeah, Ben's Wisdom mod. is +1, he is untrained, and gets no bonus for being first level, so his passive perception is 11. He could either list it as "Perception +1" or "Passive Perception 11."

Check out Aelwyn, though. She's close to hitting the 20 DC. BTW, Dreamer, your perception is +9, correct? It is listed as +2 on the character sheet which is just your racial bonus. Also you've got Nature listed (I'm looking under Initiative on your character sheet). Can you put your Insight bonus on that line, instead?

Get ready to rock tomorrow, y'all!

[Dreamer]

Yeah, I didn't know what I was doing when I was filling out that part of my stat block. I have my calculated skill checks spoilered a little below that -- and Perception is +9. Insight is only +2; can I ask why you want it under Initiative? Did I calculate something wrong? And is there anything else you'd like to have on that line?

P.S. Today was a killer. I'll post IC tomorrow when/if I get a moment, but right now my brain is too shot.

[FabesMinis]

Absolutely possible to get +10 or more on Perception or Insight. Training +5, Skill Focus +3, then a Wis of 14 or higher and you're there. Heck, I should try that for a PC one time. Passive Perception of 20. :D hehehe

[Ragadolf]

Hey All, see our chat in JSL's thread for my current status.

Will be back ASAP, promise!

Thx for chatting about the info, skills, etc. It helps me make sense of it all!
Will probably take that 'Detective' background for Ben, and update with corrected skills when I get back online at home.

Keep up the good work all!
'Hm,... Warlock competition? I'll take that challenge! ;)

[SJ@]

Dreamer wrote:

Yeah, I didn't know what I was doing when I was filling out that part of my stat block. I have my calculated skill checks spoilered a little below that -- and Perception is +9. Insight is only +2; can I ask why you want it under Initiative? Did I calculate something wrong? And is there anything else you'd like to have on that line?

P.S. Today was a killer. I'll post IC tomorrow when/if I get a moment, but right now my brain is too shot.

Sorry a/b the killer day. Work-related? Pregnancy-related? All-of-the above-related? Unrelated-and-mind-your-own-beeswax-related? Hope you have time to regroup.

As to your character sheet, I'd like those two (perception and insight) listed on that line b/c (a)those are probably the most common ones I'll look at for passive checks and (b)I'd like that info. in a uniform space across character sheets and (c)I really am too lazy to click on the spoiler button. Really.

Seriously, though. Everyone did a slightly different thing in listing their skills (I actually prefer how you spoilered all of the skills and modifiers rather than just list the trained ones), but if everyone lists perception and insight under their initiative bonus, it shaves time when I've got to make a passive check in-game. Thanks. Sorry about the nit-and-pick.

FabesMinis wrote:

Absolutely possible to get +10 or more on Perception or Insight. Training +5, Skill Focus +3, then a Wis of 14 or higher and you're there. Heck, I should try that for a PC one time. Passive Perception of 20. :D hehehe

Yep, yep. Another good example and one that doesn't rely on Elf-shaped (Vulcan) ears for the +2 racial bonus. In fact...shhhh...I think Mr. Spock is listening...or is it Dr. Spock? Either would be equally creepy.

[Dreamer]

In response to Dravos' "snide remarks," plenty of people who can't sing do so anyway! :)

[Dreamer]

SJ@ wrote:

Sorry a/b the killer day. Work-related?

Yeah, mostly. 12 hours at the office, disgruntled (and mean) client, a late night crisis call to the hospital, and three hours of sleep.

I can check some things off my list:
1) fixed the Perception and Insight placement.
2) opted for Lethal Hunter feat
3) Christmas list ideas for magic items:
- something to agility/shift/move w/o AoO (e.g. Sylvan armor?)
- something to increase healing (e.g., amulet?)
- something to improve precision (random magical item)
- either Thunderstrike or Thunder-whatever-the-other-one-is weapon

SJ@ wrote:

Yep, yep. Another good example and one that doesn't rely on Elf-shaped (Vulcan) ears for the +2 racial bonus. In fact...shhhh...I think Mr. Spock is listening...or is it Dr. Spock? Either would be equally creepy.

I'm pretty sure Dr. Spock is dead, so yeah, that would be creepy. Mr. Spock, on the other hand, had too much LDS in the 60s.

Ohh, so sleep deprived! Must nap...

[FabesMinis]

Christmas List:

Magic Staff
Delver's Cloth Armour
Amulet of Protection
Belt of Vigor
Cannith Goggles (not much use but fun sounding)

Background: Auspicious Birth

[Neil Spicer]

I never did select Ceelie's background. I think I'd like to go with Merchant Prince. I think it'll give her some weight to acting as a fence and/or selling items on the open market (or black market, if necessary).

Game-wise, it gives her a +2 bonus on Insight checks...which seems to fit with how I'm playing her as fairly observant and intuitive. Ceelie's an information-gatherer and an opportunist in just about everything.

Lastly, the Merchant Prince background gives Ceelie an extra language. I'd like to pick something useful. Right now she knows Common, Elven, and Dwarven. What else will be worthwhile in the upcoming adventure?

[SJ@]

NSpicer wrote:

Right now she knows Common, Elven, and Dwarven. What else will be worthwhile in the upcoming adventure?

Well, that's an interesting question. I've only got a limited window to look at concerning this AP (only the first two adventures are published). Off the bat, I'd say either Goblin or Giant (spoken by Orcs) if you want languages spoken by pontential enemies. Draconic if you want to speak a Dragonborn's native language. Or whatever else you think fits Ceelie.

[Neil Spicer]

SJ@ wrote:

Off the bat, I'd say either Goblin or Giant (spoken by Orcs) if you want languages spoken by pontential enemies. Draconic if you want to speak a Dragonborn's native language.

I've chosen to go with Goblin (which should still cover all goblinoids, right?)...

[SJ@]

NSpicer wrote:

I've chosen to go with Goblin (which should still cover all goblinoids, right?)...

Yep. Goblins, Hobgoblins, and Bugbears. Oh my! There are only 10 languages in 4E: Common, Deep Speech, Draconic, Dwarven, Elven, Giant (Orcs, Ogres), Goblin, Primordial (elementals, etc.), Supernal (angels, devils), and Abyssal (demons, gnolls).

[Dreamer]

Here's why I haven't picked a background for Aelwyn yet: The most "fitting" backgrounds (Forest Warden and Hunter) are just more of the same for my character. Nothing against Nature knowledge and Perception, but I would like to have a little more Insight.

The background that gives me what I want is Seducer (bonus to Insight, plus Bluff which I may or may not need) -- but I don't know that Aelwyn is the seductress type. (Especially compared to Jen, who she seems to have some rivalry with.)

So I'm tossing this out to everyone. Any suggestions for one or another that would benefit the group or enhance the character?

[Neil Spicer]

Dreamer wrote:

So I'm tossing this out to everyone. Any suggestions for one or another that would benefit the group or enhance the character?

How about Noble Scion, Noble Bred for War, or Last of the Breed? Any of those should set you up with an interesting background hook that goes a step beyond what any of the rest of us bring to the table.

[PsionicFox]

Lol, I just realized that you're all playing 4E as well. Man, if I could swing it, I'd love to get in on that action.

[SJ@]

Sorry things have dragged here. Please see my posts in the Runelords game and discussion threads.

[Dreamer]

I know Aelwyn's up, but you're just going to have to wait 'til I tomorrow when I get a moment.

(Been pretty busy, trying to squeeze in as much work as possible before I go on leave...plus all the paperwork and footwork of transferring and terminating client files... AND I've found game-related events of the past week to be rather disruptive to overall game flow and motivation. Something about this all kind of sucks right now and I'm still not sure what I want to do with it.)

However, if you're bored waiting, there's a new RotRL post and homework assignment.

[Ragadolf]

No worries. I understand completely. I kinda feel the same way.

I just felt like posting SOMEthing the other day! ;P

Good luck with your's and JSL's preparations!

[SJ@]

A couple of things...I'm not purposely trying to ignore the "we're bummed out" vibe on this and the RotR discussion thread. I just don't know what to contribute to that discussion other than to say that I feel largely responsible for the cloud that has settled over both. I feel confident in my choice, but I also feel badly over leaving so abruptly and causing some of you to feel discouraged or unmotivated to continue. Certainly a consequence of my actions, but just as certainly an unintended one.

In terms of this game, at the pace we're going, I suspect that it'll be another week before we're done with the last round of combat. I don't think it'll go much more than four rounds unless the Invisible Castle winds change direction. That being the case, does anyone desire to continue this thread as DM? I don't mind if someone would like to pick up where I leave off.

Elsir Vale looks promising for a mini-campaign, the AP in Dungeon less so as written. The second installment of the AP looks better than the first, but it really amounts to yet another dungeon crawl with some RPing bits mixed in. Running the AP will present problems after October when Dungeon and the rest of DDI becomes subscription-based. (At least I think that happens after October.) So, that's a factor in someone picking this up--unless said someone wants to create a homebrew campaign.

Just some things to consider as we wind down.

[FabesMinis]

Word up - I am keen as the proverbial mustard to run a 4E campaign on the boards - not sure about running Scales of War or not but I think it would be fun to have you chaps on board.

Ulp.

Did I just volunteer to run a game for you lot?

[Ragadolf]

Oh, yes. You did.

You are now officially committed,... or SHOULD be committed! ;)

Let's see, haven't read "Scales of War", but if it IS essentially a 'Dungeon Crawl w/ Role-Playing bits thrown in', as suggested, I would think that would make it essentially ready-made for a PbP. Especially this group, as we tend to create our OWN 'Role-Playing Moments' as we go!

I'm still in the experimental stage w/ 4E. I'm interested enough to play it, but not yet all gung-ho about it enough to jump in and say 'I'll take it from here!' (Though I must admit, the thought DID cross my mind!) :)

Not to mention the usual home/work stresses,... (and my kids Homework stress!) ;P Honestly don't think I can devote the proper amount of effort/time to running a thread,... at least not yet.

Maybe a one-shot or side trek,... to give the DM a break,... ;)We'll see!

Sant@~
I know you are just being considerate, and are obviously sensitive to the feelings of others, but I think I can reassure you that we're all good. You obviously do not want to go into details, and that is fine. I believe that everyone is just trying to respect your request and not badger you about your decision, or engage in useless speculation about it. I believe It is merely unfortunate coincidence that your departure also happened to fall on the exact same time as we had obviously reached a slowing point, and RL is jumping up and smacking several of us in the face.
In other words, I believe it is less a 'We're bummed out vibe' and more of a 'We got busy, and haven't found another subject to start chatting about yet'.

(I hope that helps, it was meant to be reassuring!) ;)

Laters~

[FabesMinis]

Oh, I'm far from bummed-out. Just busy!

[FabesMinis]

OK, so...

What would people like?

Continue with these characters, and play this adventure?

Continue with these characters, but ignore this first encounter as a play test, and start over with them in a new adventure?

Continue with these characters in a new adventure, but assume this encounter happened and I'll provide a summary of what happens afterwards?

OR

Create new characters?

:D I have a feeling that people don't want to go through the whole character creation process again, as I know people are on a learning curve with it. So, I imagine you will want to stick with these guys (who are, after all, very fun PCs) and we bring in someone else to play Kriv or Kriv departs.

[Neil Spicer]

FabesMinis wrote:

OK, so...What would people like?

I wasn't looking to do anything more than participate in a 4e playtest for a limited adventure...not a campaign, mini-campaign, or full-fledged AP. So I assumed this would be a one-shot adventure on the scale of D0: Hollow's Last Hope. I'm willing to continue participating up to a logical conclusion for the current adventure...or switch over to something similar in scope. But if you guys intend to take this one further than that, I'll probably step out in the interests of trimming down my PbP commitments.

Other than that, I'd stick with Ceelie over creating a new character...

My two-cents,
--Neil

[Ragadolf]

Whether we 'carry on' or start over, I'd probably stick with Ben. AT least until he does something stoopid and gets himself killed. ;)

Oops, still need to update him with the 'detective' background,... maybe tomorrow,...

Laters,...

[JSL]

I'd like to stick with Dravos in this game (or whatever becomes of it). And if you would like to keep Kriv as an NPC, I would be fine with that, too.

If I had to create a new character, I'm thinking human two-weapon ranger multi-classing with fighter. Two bastard swords (or maybe the new d12 axes out of Adventurer's Vault). Pit Fighter paragon path (add Wis bonus to weapon damage). Action Surge (human feat that gives you +3 to attacks when you spend an action point). All very nice.

And I agree that Santinj@'s departure just happened to hit a slow point in the game and a busy point in several of our lives. There are no hard feelings.

[Dreamer]

I like Aelwyn (even if she is a bit stereotypical) and would stick with her -- if I continue to play. This hasn't been fun for me the last few weeks; I've had trouble following along in this game and I'm feeling really lost about "so, what next?" in RotRL. I really like the role-playing aspect of D&D, but I feel like I'm losing my grasp on my role and I don't really have the inclination to delve into the mechanics of any version of the game to strategize and optimize my characters and moves.

I'm not flat-out quitting. Like the game, I'm kind of in a holding pattern. I'm just wondering -- perhaps from others' perspectives -- what's the point of this game? Is there an objective? How do you know when you're doing well or if you've won? And what keeps you going when it goes flat?