Alright, so we all know how annoying it is when we've spent a ton of time answering Pm's about our character and rolling well, as well as creating massively in depth details about character personality and back story.
So, I had the idea of creating a thread where instead of having our time wasted, GM's can scroll through a list of characters submitted and choose between them, rather than making players go through the recruitment process of possibly getting in, possibly not.
I've based this post on GM's who require rolls of 2d6+6 for each stat, and to start off, here is my character submission, which rolled 17, 17, 12, 10, 14, 13.
Every time I've rolled high like above, I've never been selected so I'm sure others have felt the same recurring disheartenment. Anyway, hopefully this will work and everyone will get the chance the deserve!
Character is this Alias.
I was also applying to the game that the OP was with this character (I also applied with her to a Kingmaker game before that and had her in two Kingmaker campaigns on Myth Weavers that died before we reached the first encounter). So I'll take any chance to get her into a Kingmaker game.
Although, CaptainCortez (that's the OP's main profile), I get the feeling some GMs might have issues with a character that's practically a carbon-copy of an anime character, let alone one as ruthless and morally-ambiguous as Lelouch vi Britannia. Most GMs see that and they'll think you're either going to do a poor job of it and just come off as one-dimensional, or worse, you do the character justice and cause him countless headaches.
I'm not saying, "Don't base a PF character on a anime one." I'm saying don't make the PF character a carbon-copy. Take elements from the inspiring character and blend them with other stuff to make someone unique.
Take a Gunslinger I made for a Council of Thieves game on Myth Weavers (spoilered for space).
I wanted to make her a tiefling but wasn't too keen on the basic version (this was before Blood of Fiends or the ARG came out, BTW) but I had seen the alternate heritages from the first CoT book (they were on the SRD by this stage) so made her a Rakshasa-Spawn Tiefling. That gave me the idea that perhaps she's a bit vain and arrogant, the former meant she'd go into a fight wearing something a bit revealing not to distract people, but make them believe she did buy into that nonsense and still underestimate her. She was a bit too proud and was very annoyed at any suggestion of her reputation being tarnished - even if it was a minor thing that nobody would care about she'd still take it more seriously than most.
So in the end; she was an amalgam of myself, Rally, the instinctive traits of a Rakshasa-Spawn and maybe a hint of Blackadder or Ciaphas Cain (she was a bit of a snarker).
Alright, so we all know how annoying it is when we've spent a ton of time answering Pm's about our character and rolling well, as well as creating massively in depth details about character personality and back story.
Isn't the nature of applying to PbP's though... you win some and you lose some? Popular AP's like Kingmaker can get as many as 30 applicants, so it's always a buyers market for GMs (fortunately or unfortunately depending on your point of view). In this particular instance, my character didn't get in either, and I had sunk some time into the application.
Nevertheless, I still think GM's should post separate recruitment threads and have the right to make specific requests of their potential players. Good GM's end up doing far more work than players after recruitment is over, so I don't begrudge any for being selective in the players they want even if I'm passed over.
In any event, the other potential issue is that 2d6+6 is not a common request from what I've experienced. I think if you want to have a pool of potential player threads (which isn't a bad idea actually), best to go with a 15 or 20 point build as that is what the majority of GM's seem to request for AP's (except for in the case of WoW which has the focus/foible method). Such a thread might actually be particularly useful for replacing players very quickly if need be.
I hate being the bearer of bad news but a 'serious GM' would probably not go looking for players in a thread like this.
When you commit to running a game, you commit to investing a lot of time and enthusiasm and you want similar minded players.
You don't want to pick a player who has posted a character in the past; who knows if that player is still available and interested in the game?
A GM will look for someone who is willing to create a character 'specifically' for his campaign.
@Players out there: if your character is NOT specific, try to fake it or have a good reason.
Again, the DM is going to invest a lot of time in this and wants players who will, at least, invest the time in character creation. If the players start out being lazy at this stage, it does not 'look good' for the future.
All that said, I know it's a drag not getting picked (been there plenty of times) but I don't think this is the answer.
I think the answer is making the process of character creation fun and an opportunity to learn something new about Golarion (or wherever). Create a very specific 'great PC' that's fun to play; enjoy reading/learning about new places.
If that happens then getting picked is just gravy. And if the above happens, then your chances of getting picked just got a lot better.
Happy gaming!
Well take my guy for example. He was made for this campaign and was made three times over. I have a 2d6+6 build, a 20 point build and my original for when I played this in real life. He worked incredibly well when I played the first book, but that was as far as the GM ran it.
I don't.consider this lazy and all a GM needs to do if they see a character they like, is PM to ask if they're still interested in playing. A lot of GM'S ask for a complete build and so putting a ton of effort in, and rolling well but never having your characters picked when you've rolled well isn't fun in the slightest.
I've actually not once in my entire life been picked for a campaign when I've rolled well, so creating a thread such as this, with a pool of potential players will give everyone a chance.
As for carbon copies of animé characters, Lelouch is close to that of his original in code geass, but having played him briefly once in this, I know that the events of the campaign in book 1 at least unfold differently because it's a different world and story. His goal remains the same, but as a roleplaying game, uou roll your actions dependent on what happens. It works and it's awesome.
Kingmaker is the only real campaign he works in though, because of the kingdom building etc, but as long as you don't kill main npc's...which I don't usually ever do, it's fine. It's what I've done though, taken heavy inspiration and made him as close to the character as I could, without making an unworkable copy. Still, it's hard for some people to grasp the concept and understand him thinking he's evil, when he actually is neutral good, with only good intentions. He just goes about things in a tyrannical way.
Still, as much as I want to play this, I didn't make this thread for myself. I made it so anyone who wants to play Kingmaker can submit their characters so GM's have an easier time picking characters, and players don't need to worry or feel bad if they don't make it.
It makes the process quicker when a gm can pick characters they like and send the same pm to everyone than having to type a massive intro post etc.
For what it's worth, as a GM, I'd never select a player from a list like this. I feel like the onus should be on the player to look at a GM's recruitment post and his/her requirements, desires, and expectations, and decide if they would like to apply from there. There's no problem with reusing character concepts from different applications, but you should always make the effort to meet the GM's standards and requests rather than simply copy-pasting it over from one game to another.
(For what it's worth, while I loved Code Geass, and think Lulu is an interesting character, I'd be much more interested in someone inspired by them rather than a carbon copy.)
For what it's worth, as a GM, I'd never select a player from a list like this. I feel like the onus should be on the player to look at a GM's recruitment post and his/her requirements, desires, and expectations, and decide if they would like to apply from there. There's no problem with reusing character concepts from different applications, but you should always make the effort to meet the GM's standards and requests rather than simply copy-pasting it over from one game to another.
That's pretty much what I was trying to say. I don't think this thread such a bad idea though, as there might be GM's who would look at it in a pinch... but I personally never would, and a great many wouldn't. Since GM's (at least the good ones) put in a lot of effort to run a game, it's not at all unfair for them to have high expectations of players during and after the recruitment phase.
As far as I'm concerned... character generation is part of the fun of applying to games anyway. Not all your characters will get selected, and that's just the way these things roll (no pun intended). A concept you built for one AP might get rejected by one GM and accepted by another, which is why I too have a number of AP specific concepts that can be retooled when the right AP gets posted.
Lastly, I would just generally avoid concepts heavily borrowed from other sources. I can't say that I have ever seen anyone successfully get into a game when doing that.
Then you haven't played with me. ;)
When I borrow concepts that AREN'T CARBON COPIES, I really really get into character, and surely spending months on a character concept is the opposite of lazy.
It takes me a good 3 hours to successfully get a character build up and running, whether editing an old one or not, and even longer to make a back story, and if you read everything I've said about this character, it's easy to understand that while he's based on Lelouch from Code Geass, he's from Brevoy, is an Orlovsky, and as such, his background is different to that of the show, as I'm sure a member (Tie my Shoelace) on here can tell you, having played this character with him in a brief homebrew campaign.
Not only that, he'd be a fine addition in any party with how supportive he is of those working with him, regardless of whether or not he has his own roles.
How the idea came about originally was because I absolutely hate Clerics. I hate them with a passion and hate how people call you a heal bot. So, when my GM at the time told me I couldn't be what I wanted and practically forced me to be a Cleric, I was like fine, but on my own terms, so I made my interpretation of Lelouch, and he was INCREDIBLY powerful in a 20 point buy.
It's not my first PBP at all, but when i apply, it should be just as much about the player as the GM in my mind. That's how I run my games when I'm GM. I only apply to AP's I want in one, and only play 2 main ones at a time, so I can focus on them.
I just really want to play this guy in Kingmaker because not only was he made for the campaign, but he's a damn good Cleric.
It's ignorant to think that any character based on something is a carbon copy. It's impossible. Backgrounds are different, settings are different, lifestyles are different.
The only things that makes my Lelouch, Lelouch, are his personality, moralistic views and powers, but with the addition of expending spells for spontaneous healing.
I take my roleplay seriously and don't ever do anything to jeopardise a story by killing off main characters, and Lelouch was made to heavily support a team, while being incredibly good at commanding people.
His full personality and details are on this profile, with additional information I can drag out of PM's and post in here, if you'd like to know more (which I doubt as this is already an essay).
I only apply to things I want to be a part of, and having applied for the past 2-3 campaigns and not being accepted really sucks when you've made a character work for a campaign, as I'm sure many others can agree with.
Lelouch - Honestly, I know nothing about the source material (I wouldn't even have been aware there was any without this thread), and I'm not a GM that requires a great deal of background, but I know that if I saw this character applying to my Kingmaker game, I'd give it a pass.
I don't really want to give an unasked for point-by-point critique, although if you'd like one I'd be happy to do it. What I will say is that after reading it it feels very much like you don't know anything about the Brevoy / River Kingdoms area, and you tried to shoehorn a generic character in. I may be wrong, but since the only thing I have to go on when you apply to a campaign is the character and background, my wrong impression would keep you out.
Well, as it looks like people are mostly against the idea of submitting characters to a pool, I'll elaborate more on the subject, although I wouldn't mind reading why you personally wouldn't pick him, even if it's a brief sentence. :)
This is what I've explained about his personality in full, which isn't in my profile:
He's a good character to roleplay for story, a good character to roleplay with spells, a good character to aid others and a good character for getting his own way.
He's Neutral Good because although his intentions are good, he's a bit of a tyrant. He'll go to any measures to ensure he reaches his goals and victory, and is one opponent the wisest of people (friends included), would probably fear.
Still, I think he has a lot of options and I'm a mature enough roleplayer to not get story centric characters to kill each other, or at least not on purpose, but then I have Knowledge (Nobility), so should have a good idea of important figures regardless.
Fighters can fight and well at that, but have a massive chance of failing against do or die spells, where as my guy is the opposite. He's terrible at fighting and would die in any battle if faced head on, but that's where I have to play him cleverly, because he's most likely not going to die against any do or die spell, as his Wisdom/Will Saves will be so high.
So I don't see him as being irrelevant in any way. I just see him as any other character. He has a role to fill, and instead of being a tank, he's a very powerful supporting character, who tactically positions himself in every fight, and acts accordingly to any situation that presents itself to him. :)
3. As for the Neutral Evil thing. Maybe I've put the wrong message across, but his underlying intentions are good. He just doesn't let his conscience get in the way when reaching his goals. So although he's friendly to those around him and will heavily aid anyone he deems worthy or loyal to him, he's pretty evil to his enemies in how he deals with them, though you could argue that he's no more evil than any other party member. Party members kill to survive, and that's what he does. He just does it in a different way.
That being said, his motives are to protect all innocents and to create a Nation/Kingdom where all are welcome and people can live at peace, in the protection of his Kingdom. His goal to destroy House Orlovsky is more specifically aimed at his evil and oppressive Father and not his family members, and with his abilities (lesser geas), he could reach his goals without waging war.
Personality:
The Good
1. Friendly
2. Loyal to those who are loyal to him
3. Highly supportive of his team
4. Only kills to reach a greater good
5. Protector of the innocent
6. Will aid those who seek it, in return for their support to his cause
7. Excellent leader
8. Very Diplomatic
9. Highly intelligent (well, he does focus on Wisdom, Intelligence and Charisma, haha)
10. Has a conscience that can sometimes get the better of him
11. Always plans new strategies
12. Is polite, well mannered, speaks with respect and is well spoken
The Bad
1. Isn't afraid to manipulate others to get to where he wants to be
2. Could be seen as a Tyrant, even if his intentions are good
3. Sometimes hurts others to get to a greater good
4. Can be quite scheming behind the scenes
5. Does what needs to be done, sometimes through questionable means
The good here massively outweighs the bad, so that's why I have him down as Neutral Good, not Neutral Evil, because he may do bad things at times, but as a natural born leader, he makes the hard decisions others cannot, and takes full responsibility for all consequences of his actions.
He wants to create a world where people can live peacefully and without fear, and will do anything behind the scenes to ensure good people can live his dream.
Also, he would enter under an alias, with his identity hidden, doing tasks that would place him as a symbol of hope for his people, while nobody would know who he is or what he looks like, due to being hidden under a costume. He doesn't want people to know who he is. At least not yet.
As for knowing about Brevoy, no. His father is the leader of house Orlovsky. He has as much power as a leader of a house can, and coming into the adventure, getting rid of his father is his original goal, though that isn't something I'd do in the campaign, unless of course the campaign made you have a run in with the Orlovsky house. That said, his main goal is to create a nation where everyone's welcome, and to become a symbol of hope for those he crosses paths with.
I don't personally know much about Brevoy as a player, past what the players guide tells you for Kingmaker, and so I can only base the character around the world from the information given. I want to learn of the area more through story, especially as Lelouch would have had a pretty sheltered life before leaving. He simply wouldn't know too much about the area, so both myself and the character would learn as we went along, and that's the enjoyment of playing an AP, learning about the story as you progress, not knowing about the area from the start. :/
Hmm, then I don't see it mattering much if you don't know much of the Nation.
I know of the Gods etc, but my Cleric is one of his own ideals, so it would kisy literally be a Noble was swapped as a peace trade, along with his sister, and his son, wanting to rise up against him, expressed interest in building a nation, and the restov swordlords decided to use that to their advantage.
That's pretty much why he's on the adventure. :p
Also, thanks for the links. I don't usually check things like that, and don't personally think there's anything wrong with my back story, having linked it to the sword lords, but there might be extra bits I can add.
Whew, that's a lot of text. Since you asked, here's my initial impressions. Do keep in mind that these are all just my initial impressions - other GMs might feel differently.
And that's all I have the time for now. I can do the other spoiler you posted later today, but this should give you some idea of how a GM would read the character.
I don't think any of this is insurmountable. It'd be entirely possible to rewrite this character to keep the essential personality and characteristics intact but still fit into the world better and sound more appropriate to a 1st level character. But as written, I'd give it a pass in favor of other applications, since there's always more applications than slots.
Well, Zero is the alias he goes by.
He's not lawful and he's not evil. Wanting peace and for everyone around him to be happy is a very good thing, but going about things any way necessary to his cause is what makes him neutral, because you're not swayed by good or bad things when you're neutral, and don't mind doing either, which is exactly what he does, although he can be somewhat chaotic.
He isn't religious. Doesn't care for it, and I only ever play Clerics of own ideals. It's just something I care so little about that none of my characters are religious, although I have had characters who acknowledge the ideals of deities and agree with them, but that's not really a problem for me.
14 is not genius level intellect I agree, but with his Charisma and his Wisdom being SO high, he's a genius, mentally.
Improved initiative was chosen over Spell Focus because he acts fast, and that is his advantage. If it was a boring 20 point buy (which is what I always seem to play under), his Strength score is usually a 7, with his Dex being an 8 or 9, but a 10 is still very underwhelming.
As for the crossbow, not being real life, he can't just point it and insta-kill with it. He rarely uses it because he's no good with it (he has like a +1 to hit with it. Pretty pointless, but there as a safety measure).
He dislikes House Lebeda, because Orlovsky's hate house Lebeda, though the reasons should be in his backstory somewhere, because they're official reasons I pulled from the players guide.
I do disagree about seeing people as pawns being evil though. It's just a matter of perspective and if anything, just further proves his disconnection from reality. As in, he's in his own world kinda thing.
The personal quote of creating and destroying worlds, apart from being his quote of the show I based it on, is because he can make anyone do anything he desires, and that power went to his head (even at level 1 he has that power through command and murderous command) and it's something that should be thought about to a much deeper level than destroying a physical world. If he's getting people to kill each other, those peoples worlds are ending, not the planet those of Golarion live on. It's not always so literal in a physical sense.
Kururugi was used as a lesser Noble and plot hook, if the GM so chose. The Kururugi name may not have a house like Orlovsky, but they have wealth and can easily be implemented in the story if the GM so chose.
The cause Lelouch has joined is the one of Restov's. The player's guide says it's the Restov Swordlords who have hired you, and so I linked everything to that, because I'm not for just randomly being somewhere at the most convenient time and place.
Keep in mind, whether or not you can answer my points, the fact that I had so many of them means you've already lost your place in my hypothetical campaign. I'd have just passed on you in favor of someone else, without bothering to go into the detailed breakdown I did here. At most, I'd have asked you to elaborate on the "unneccsary war" a bit.
The PbP forums here are a GM's market - there's always more players than slots, so a GM can pick and choose the best of everyone who applied, and not bother digging deeper into a less impressive application. You might do better by cutting it down than elaborating on it more - for example, if you were either disinherited and ran off to the swordlords, or sent away for political reasons (perhaps a forced marrage for a trade advantage?) and had some other reason for going to them, there would be less to pick at than being both disinherited, traded away, and used to stop a war. "Trade advantage" doesn't require further elaboration, because the details don't matter - your father gained an advantage from someone else because of it. An "unnecessary war" does, because it doesn't indicate why the war was unnecessary, who was involved, or why giving you away would stop it. There's other examples, but "less is more" should be a rule to live by when writing character backgrounds.
As for specific points:
Well, Zero is the alias he goes by.
Not inidcated anywhere I saw. That would be a trivial addition "Alias: Zero", but the fact it was missing is a turn-off.
He's not lawful and he's not evil. Wanting peace and for everyone around him to be happy is a very good thing, but going about things any way necessary to his cause is what makes him neutral, because you're not swayed by good or bad things when you're neutral, and don't mind doing either, which is exactly what he does, although he can be somewhat chaotic
I thought I saw on his sheet that he was NG. That means he doesn't care about following the law exactly, but still respects it (not Lawful, not Chaotic), but he still believes in doing the right thing (Good). There's a lot of debate on the forums about whether sacrificing a few for the sake of the many is a good thing or not, but the way in which you wrote it made it sound like a very calculating, intentional decision, which (to my mind) is the Evil take on it. And imposing his own type of order on people is very much a LE attitude. As I said orignally, I'm just one GM, giving you my take. Others may disagree with me. But I'd either seriously question your alignment, or start shifting it towards LE when you did things such as sacrifice some for the sake of others.
He isn't religious. Doesn't care for it, and I only ever play Clerics of own ideals. It's just something I care so little about that none of my characters are religious, although I have had characters who acknowledge the ideals of deities and agree with them, but that's not really a problem for me.
Again, this is my take on it. Clerics of ideals are legal. But if you're that opposed to religion, you might want to consider another class than cleric. Oracles are similar, but specificially act outside of their deity's standard religious structure. Inquisitors are by nature independant. And a witch can do a lot of cleric-like things, but without any dieity involved whatsoever.
Improved initiative was chosen over Spell Focus because he acts fast, and that is his advantage. If it was a boring 20 point buy (which is what I always seem to play under), his Strength score is usually a 7, with his Dex being an 8 or 9, but a 10 is still very underwhelming.
Fair enough. As I said, it's a personal choice. And that would explain the physical description better... except that this instance of the character doesn't have those flaws, so the description should be adapted to it. Otherwise it sounds like "existing character concept shoehorned in".
He dislikes House Lebeda, because Orlovsky's hate house Lebeda, though the reasons should be in his backstory somewhere, because they're official reasons I pulled from the players guide.
If he was disowned and kicked out, why would he care about carrying on his family's grudges?
I do disagree about seeing people as pawns being evil though. It's just a matter of perspective and if anything, just further proves his disconnection from reality. As in, he's in his own world kinda thing.
This goes back to the "greater good" argument. If he was simply delusional and assocated everyone with a chess piece, with most people being pawns, that would be one thing, but treating people as pawns is not something I consider a Good act.
The personal quote of creating and destroying worlds, apart from being his quote of the show I based it on, is because he can make anyone do anything he desires, and that power went to his head (even at level 1 he has that power through command and murderous command) and it's something that should be thought about to a much deeper level than destroying a physical world. If he's getting people to kill each other, those peoples worlds are ending, not the planet those of Golarion live on. It's not always so literal in a physical sense.
That is entirely reasonable. But it's not at all obvious from the quote which seems very much about literal worlds. And taken in the metaphysical sense, it's not a Good thought.
Kururugi was used as a lesser Noble and plot hook, if the GM so chose. The Kururugi name may not have a house like Orlovsky, but they have wealth and can easily be implemented in the story if the GM so chose.
Reasonable. You should indicate it as such to the GM with a footnote or an OOC tag saying "Optional plot hook" or something like that.
The cause Lelouch has joined is the one of Restov's. The player's guide says it's the Restov Swordlords who have hired you, and so I linked everything to that, because I'm not for just randomly being somewhere at the most convenient time and place.
This is just a grammatical issue, then. The only object in the sentence was "nobles", so "their" could only refer to them. If you said the swordlords explicitly, it wouldn't be an issue.
|
LOL, I can see how both sides have validity.
We have had a few dropouts, feel free to apply:
http://paizo.com/campaigns/KingmakerTheStolenLands/recruiting#10
Key word: FizzyVerries
Well, really, we just expect very different things from our games then Bobson.
Clerics of own ideals are fully legal, and I originally made him a cleric because the GM running the campaign I was in, forced me to be a Cleric, so I made one I could have fun with, and ended up being the most powerful character there, even with all of my physical weaknesses.
A lot of the things I've elaborated with you on above are what ruin the surprise when playing.
I've played my entire tabletop life, with a GM who keeps every other players character a secret, but always tells others what I'm playing so they can tweak their characters to be better than mine.
As such, I don't elaborate on everything. Instead, I leave a lot of things to surprise in game, so creator and destroyer of worlds is all I typed, when really it's a lot deeper than that, as are most things in my characters motives.
Not every character is 2 dimensional, and every single one of my characters have their own goals and secrets that aren't in their description, and I always see that as part of the fun. If you accept a character you know little about, you, along with the other players might have some pretty awesome surprises.
I don't like to throw everything out there. I only like to throw enough out to garner interest and curiosity. ;)
Edit: Just as a quickie, I've actually added a HUGE amount of information for BloodWolven's campaign above, and whether I'm picked or not, it now contains a huge amount of plot hooks and pretty much has no plot holes. It's a solid alias. :)
Well, really, we just expect very different things from our games then Bobson.
Oh, definitely. I've said all along that all of it was just my impressions. I consider myself relatively impartial (except for where I specifically call things out as my preference) but that by no means means that I actually am, or that anyone else would agree with me.
Clerics of own ideals are fully legal, and I originally made him a cleric because the GM running the campaign I was in, forced me to be a Cleric, so I made one I could have fun with, and ended up being the most powerful character there, even with all of my physical weaknesses.
Clerics of ideals are fully legal in the Pathfinder RPG, but my impression is that they're not really thematic in Golarian. I think I remember PFS prohibiting it, and I don't know of any Paizo-published cleric that doesn't have a deity. I think it's been stated explicitly too, but I'm not tracking it down. I don't like them, but this is one of those areas where many people differ.
Also, if your GM forced you to be a class you dislike, he's a bad GM. I'm pretty sure most people would agree with that.
I've played my entire tabletop life, with a GM who keeps every other players character a secret, but always tells others what I'm playing so they can tweak their characters to be better than mine.
As such, I don't elaborate on everything. Instead, I leave a lot of things to surprise in game, so creator and destroyer of worlds is all I typed, when really it's a lot deeper than that, as are most things in my characters motives.
I feel sorry for you. That must really suck. :(
I'd probably leave, if that was how my GM treated me.Not every character is 2 dimensional, and every single one of my characters have their own goals and secrets that aren't in their description, and I always see that as part of the fun. If you accept a character you know little about, you, along with the other players might have some pretty awesome surprises.
I don't like to throw everything out there. I only like to throw enough out to garner interest and curiosity. ;)
The key problem, though, is that there's no indication that there's this depth to the character. I would look at what was there, think "Shallow" and move on. What other people might see as hooks to elaborate on, I see as half-thought-out statements with no indication that there's any more. Even the people who see them as hooks probably wouldn't necessarily see them as already fleshed out hooks.
Edit: Just as a quickie, I've actually added a HUGE amount of information for BloodWolven's campaign above, and whether I'm picked or not, it now contains a huge amount of plot hooks and pretty much has no plot holes. It's a solid alias. :)
I haven't read it yet, but it definitely looks more solid. Paragraphs of varying lengths, description of the relatives, and a better balance between history and personality. I'm already more favorably inclined to this incarnation, and I'm looking forward to having a chance to read it.
Good luck with recruitment!
|
Clerics of own ideals are fully legal
This is true for a generic setting. Not Golarion. In Golarion, clerics that do not worship a deity do not get spells and they do not get domain abilities.
If you have questions about this, you can find comments on this from a number of the Paizo staff, but here's a pretty definitive comment from James Jacobs. "Clerics in Golarion must have deities."
Here's another comment from last month in case you're wondering if that has changed recently.
That said, ultimately this a GM call. An individual GM can house rule it any way they like. You're taking a chance with a character who is built entirely around a concept that requires a house rule, but that's between you and your GM. Just don't be surprised if you find other GMs that agree with Bobson.
Thanks a lot, and yea, that's the issue though. He's the only GM local to me, and someone I spent some of my school life with, yet he treats me like a cast off and favours everyone else, but if I want to play tabletop, I have no choice. Catch 22 lol.
When I originally played this guy in his Kingmaker campaign, he laughed and said he wouldn't work and would be a waste of time, yet it turned out he was the most powerful character in the game, and not just the NPC's, but the PC's were terrified of my guy and his abilities....Apart from the Half-Orc Fighter, Galgo, who fought bravely by my side, as he respected my guy and they became incredibly loyal to one another. Difference I guess was that he can roleplay without letting OOC reasons get in the way. The GM also told me that I could become ruler and encouraged me to boost my Charisma (I got it to a +3), then when it came to it, he said he's made a GM decision and that the summoner would be leader (on the grounds she had +4 Cha), which the player of Galgo heavily disagreed with, as Lelouch had lead them all to victory countless times, while the Summoner was always at the back, hiding and saying very little (of which the GM argued I was taking away the summoner's spotlight, which the fighter's player also heavily disagreed with, saying that's something that should be roleplayed then, though the GM favours the player of the Summoner as he lodges with him and is good friends with him, when they're not stabbing each other in the back) so that was number 2 of screwing me over.
As such, I created a 100% full proof plan to dethrone the summoner and imprison her. Sadly though, it didn't come to that because through a random encounter, another Cleric decided to tell me to swap placed with him, which I ignored for 5 rounds, until I accidentally lost focus because he became really argumentative about it out of character, so I said ok, at which point he forgot to mention he wasn't holding his turn to meet with mine, so half of the party got wiped out.
The summoner wasn't here or playing at the time, so Lelouch's most loyal ally fell due to this silly mistake, then all that was eventually left was the druid and his wolf, but here's the catch...
My guy peed off the worgs because he told them to kill each other and they began to, but both myself and the other cleric went down, and regardless of the fact the druid and his wolf were still standing, the GM ruled that the worg's would coup de grace me and leave the other cleric alive on the floor. So, that's screw me over number 3.
Finally, number 4 was that he finally allowed me to run with a side quest as my new character to recover Lelouch's body and have it revived. I got to play my intro mission, but as it was set 3 months later, I had to wait in game for 3 months. Now, we were at the kingdom building stage where literally it took a few seconds to roll for a new month to pass, but after making me wait for a month and a half IRL almost purposely not rolling for the months, one of the players finally said he'd be ok for me to join, so then a month and a half had passed, it came to that time, I was sitting at the table for the whole 3 hours when the rolling came along and they decided to have a vote off.
Some people wanted to continue playing, others wanted to pause to roll for months. It eventually got down to half and half with the votes, with one saying he doesn't mind either way, another voting for me and one voting against (the summoner). It was all on the guy who said he'd vote for me to come in and then he simply said "we continue". That's number 4 right there.
Issue is, a lot of the players and GM seem to have an attitude where they like power and have to rule over other people, regardless of how uncool that is, and so when the summoner player laughed and said my plan to overthrow him wouldn't work, I explained exactly how I was going to do it, and that it would have taken 2 years in game to pull off, but would have been flawless, his jaw dropped and he was left speechless until the words "oh my god...." came out of his mouth. He then said nothing more and walked away dumbfounded. Just a shame I couldn't pull that off, and they died in an encounter BECAUSE they didn't have that extra support from my backup fighter.
He's also allowed players who have had their characters die, to create characters that automatically hate a race that are already in the party they're coming in to join, and as such, party conflict has always been around.
As a note, I'm not for malicious PVP acts, but I don't like safety nets and so I'm happy with party conflict, so long as players can player maturely and it offers more for the plot, and isn't a case of outright murdering the other player in their sleep etc.
I've been pushed to a point in character where a halfling I once played was bullied by a half-elf and shot at (Zen Archer Half-Elf) and kicked and mocked about slavery so much that my guy wanted to kill the character, but he didn't. The player is a bully, as are his characters, but instead, my guy eventually gave his life for the party, as saving their lives meant more to him than killing a stupid half-elf.
Sadly though, all of the other characters also died and the only one to live was the half-elf bully, who always told us to work as a team (yet never did himself) and cheated with his rolls. This was in Legacy of Fire against the Carrion King, so I'm enjoying the campaign I'm in atm of LoF, because as a player I plan to get revenge on the King, and have a character with a back story that's focused on the annihilation of Gnoll's. :p
Oh and enjoy the read of my Alias Bobson! :)
@Lictor Lane - Is that not just for Pathfinder Society games? I've never played one, so have no knowledge of the Society rules I'm afraid.
|
It's true for Pathfinder Society only because it's true for Golarion canon. In Golarion there's no such thing as a cleric of an ideal (or a "godless" cleric).
If your GM is okay with changing that, that's a different story, however. (Personally I hate clerics of ideals--it feels like a huge cop-out to me. But I'm not your GM, soooo...)
Ha, yep. Many things are wrong with them, and the GM frequently posts on here, so it's dodgy saying everything, but whatever. It's odd, because I like playing in his campaigns, but with such selfish players and favouritism from the GM, it always spoils the experience and causes arguments.
The player of Galgo actually left and refuses to play with them ever again due to the arguments and constant moaning, yet always has fun when it's just me around, so there's a huge amount of negativity within the group, and just feelings that aren't very nice.
Though, the GM's not a good friend anyway, because I found out a few things he'd said about me to people in school (years back), and he's always too quick to ostracise and drop me from things, in favour of meeting new people. If I cared overly, I wouldn't continue to play with him in his campaigns, but like I said, I prefer playing IRL so I don't cut my nose off to spite my face.
I'm the opposite and the job I'm trying to get (Community Moderation/Management/Social Media) is where my heart and passion lies, as I like to include everyone with everything I do, as I know from my younger years how much it hurts to be left out of things, and so I don't want that for anyone.
Also, thanks for the clarification guys. :)
Out of every caster, I only like playing Clerics of own ideals as I don't feel limited in any way. Fighter types however, I usually play Fighters and Barbarians, though I've grown a love for Rangers recently, and created a Martial Artist I plan to use via the Monk Archetype sometime, who goes by the name of Kaze, fighting with his bare hands to become the greatest fighter in all of Golarion!
Yeah, but he never listens and most of the time his response is "I'm the GM. What I say goes."
So, I tend to say nothing unless I'm really bothered by something now. I want to game, not argue. :p
On the subject of players and GMs, it is indeed a GM's market. Since the GM/DM/storyteller/whatnot is the one that puts the most effort in a PbP, so it is perfectly understandable for them to also put a bit of effort in the recruitment of the players if they want their game to not only persevere, but prosper. So, I have to agree with the ones before who said that though this is a very nice idea, it is not very likely to bear fruit.
Furthermore, to give my point of view as a player (I do not have the interest or energy to run a game, I have to admit), I must say I am almost as picky about which games I will submit a character for as GMs are about which players they will accept. If I am to make the effort to create a character -fun process though it may be- I am going to do it when the GM starting the game is one who has proven himself dependable before and does not drop games at the drop of a hat (of course, this means that I may avoid new GMs who may turn out to be great to play with, but c'est la vie). If I do get picked alongside other presumably good and dependable players, great; if I do not, eh, maybe next time.
On the note of clerics of ideals, I very much dislike them, though I am not particularly fond of clerics in general, or paladins for that matter. But divinity in Golarion is very much real -there is no "if there is a god or gods"- and the deities grants spells. I admit I have not read the rules all that much, but I find it a bit weird that someone would spontaneously get the ability to cast spells because he upheld an ideal too much. Still, that is just me...
But, as far as liking clerics of ideals out of all casters due to not feeling limited, there are wizards and sorcerers and oracles and witches and magi and summoners and inquisitors and rangers out there. Granted, not all of the above are full casters who at the same time boast more than adequate martial ability, but they are not as limited as clerics and paladins, at least in respect of having to follow the doctrines of a specific deity (with the exception perhaps of inquisitors). In fact, it could be argued that the oracle is a cleric of an ideal more or less, albeit one who casts spells spontaneously.
Just my two cents, mind you.