Round two, fight!
Wait, no, wrong game. Recruit!
GM Anthrog has kindly offered to take up running another Rise of the Runelords on my behalf. They have 'imposed' the following limitations:
- no more than 5 players (incluing yourself, I imagine)
- Paizo material only
- unchained classes only (for those classes that apply)
- 15 PT buy abilities
- 1 trait must be a campaign trait from the player's guide, anniversary edition.
I'm going to be honest, normally, I would prefer a higher point buy(at least 20) but considering I so very badly want to play this, if the GM wants 15, we'll go with 15.
Now, they also said anything else was up to me, so I'm going to throw out suggestions to be discussed by potential players:
1) Gestalt. I greatly prefer gestalt games, but I am well aware they are not for everyone, and they can possibly unbalance a game and encounters.
2) Background skills. This is probably one of my favorite 'optional' rules, from Unchained. So much so that I personally don't consider it optional and have made it standard for any games I run.
3) Bonus(usually 1) background feat. This is another houserule that has become standard for my games. Each PC gets one bonus feat that must not be combat applicable. Proficiency feats, skill focus, the various +2 to two skills, etc. Metamagic feats aren't really allowed either. Basically if it grants a straight up increase to combat effectiveness, it's not a background feat.
4) How many traits? Some GMs stick with the two suggested in APG, but others allow two, plus a campaign trait(3 total). I'm fine with either.
*********************
I'm fairly certain these are my main suggestions and are fully open to discussion.
|
1- I enjoy gestalt, It lets me make a more versatile character. It could be a help on 15pt buy. It makes certain ideas work so much easier/fluidly (such as a gunquisitor)
2- background skills are nice, though I think unneeded if gestalt is in use.
3- No real opinion either way. 2
4- As a player, more traits is always nice, but, no real opinion.
how does the GM feel about goblin PCs?
Hey Monkeygod thanks for setting this up!
1) I'm not opposed to Gestalt. It opens a lot of options, but can cause some inbalance. If gestalt is your thing, and its good with the GM, its fine by me!
2) I run background skills in all my IRL games. So thats where my preference stands.
3)This also opens up more options for flavorful builds imho. Im for it.
4)When playing an adventure path, I like 3 traits, (even if it requires taking a drawback to get the 3rd). Campaign trait ties you into the game/setting, one trait for mechanical benefit, and one trait to flesh out my character's personality.
Oh. I was on that other thread! SO awesome of you, Anthrog, to run this! Been wanting to play this forever...
1)Will be honest and say I haven't seen one of these games in action, so I don't really have an opinon on this.
2)Background skills, I like 'em.
3)If one of the traits has to be campaign based, I always like another trait being made available.
4)I'm fine with two, but 3's always nice.
GM Anthrog and Monkeygod thanks for putting this together!
1) Gestalt: Meh, I can go either way, it certainly changes the difficulty/dynamic of the game.
2) Background skills: Love background skills, especially when players build backgrounds that actually include them.
3) Bonus(usually 1) background feat. Basically if it grants a straight up increase to combat effectiveness, it's not a background feat. I've not played in a game where this was done. It sounds like a nice addition to backgrounds, of course it can be 'gamed' to emphasize combat related skills.
4) How many traits? Hey, the more traits the better right? Again, like gestalt it makes the characters more powerful.
Looking forward to seeing the final breakdown on character recruitment, Monkeygod, what are you thoughts on races and classes?
This is what GM Anthrog said in the other thread.
Limitations I will impose:
- no more than 5 players (incluing yourself, I imagine)
- Paizo material only
- unchained classes only (for those classes that apply)
- 15 PT buy abilities
- 1 trait must be a campaign trait from the player's guide, anniversary editionAnything else is completely up to you.
I would echo the races and classes question. Though, i usually end up a core race anyways. (Most often human)
Should we consider a bit of party balance for this game as well, before we're all decided, or are we not concerned with that?
I'd be down for that for sure, but I guess that depends on if this is a standard recruitment or not. Harder to consider or navigate party balance of there end up being 25+ submissions like on GM Inara's Mummy's Mask.
Do you have any particular concepts in mind?
1) Gestalt: Maybe. I like gestalt for some games and dislike for others. It depends a lot on other things - Anthorg is a good GM, so I'd go with his feeling. The 15-point-buy kind of helps limiting power creep, so that's promising.
2) Background skills: That's a definite yes on my book. This is a great set of rules. I especially like the cases where the GM says that craft (alchemy) isn't a background skill for alchemists and investigators, or that perform isn't a background skill for bards and skalds.
3) Bonus (usually 1) background feat: While I usually don't like it, there are some ideas that are interesting; like, one free "story" feat, or "racial", or "teamwork" or "betrayal"... I think they add a cool mix to the game. Some other iterations just feel like freebies.
4) How many traits? In my opinion, one trait and one campaign trait from the book, with no drawbacks. Extra traits via the feat is fine.
I will likely be playing some sort of rogue/swashbuckler. IF we end up going gesstalt, I might pair with magus or another 6th level caster.
3) Bonus (usually 1) background feat: While I usually don't like it, there are some ideas that are interesting; like, one free "story" feat, or "racial", or "teamwork" or "betrayal"... I think they add a cool mix to the game. Some other iterations just feel like freebies.
I agree that they should be limited to more "flavorful" choices. No need for too much mechanical benefit, but it can help cement a charcter's personality or goals.
|
|
eldritch Rogue/Magus... sounds tasty haha.
Just to put it out there, if goblins are allowed, I'd likely play a goblin alchemist and... something else...maybe oracle.
That or a gun/bolt ace marksman + either alchemist or.. not sure. It all depends on how "fun" or "serious" we want to go with the game.
I've never played a Wizard, in almost 15 years of gaming. (Partly because I Perma GM my home games, and partially because i just lean to martial/skilled chatacters)
This might be a good spot for that. Also, PbP affords the time to manage spells effectively.
Have any of you played a Wizard in PbP? Any feedback on issues or hangups I should be aware of?
Also, I'm not even close to set in stone on this yet either.
I was thinking a Bard of some type, probably archeologist, but with the other ideas I'm hearing, if that's how you guys go, I might just go straight Fighter or maybe even Cleric so we have some muscle to back up all the skill-monkeys.
|
|
I've never played a Wizard, in almost 15 years of gaming. (Partly because I Perma GM my home games, and partially because i just lean to martial/skilled chatacters)
This might be a good spot for that. Also, PbP affords the time to manage spells effectively.
Have any of you played a Wizard in PbP? Any feedback on issues or hangups I should be aware of?
Also, I'm not even close to set in stone on this yet either.
make sure to keep good track of your spells. You can go weeks in PbP without a rest, so keeping spells updated and quick to reference helps. Have a spoiler template in your profile for them.
I'm into this! I've had several game die on me back to back.
1) I'm not sure I'm comfortable with Gestalt.
2) I'm fine with Background skills
3)I really love this idea. I think an addition skill feat takes a lot of pressure of character creation.
4) I'm fine either way.
I might try a Slayer (I want to test out how well it combined the martial/skilled roles) or maybe an unchained summoner (as long as I can decide on an appropriate subtype)
But I definitely want be Varisian.
I am interested. I love gestalt and I am fine with the other suggested aspects.
How are you going to be choosing players?
How often is posting expected?
Interested, especially the gestalt angle (other rule options ok as well).
just going to wait for a bit more clarity on the recuitment requriements :)
1) I am in favor of gestalt. Not because of how powerful it could be, but because it was how I learned many moons ago. I also love the opposite attracts kind of combos to come up with, something about a Druid/Bard could be fun to play.
2) I use Background skills when I DM. I also look to make sure they line up with the character's background and that they aren't taking linguistics for the sake of knowing all of the language.
3) A free skill focus? Yes please!
4) With all of the above we could be getting... I would go with 1 campaign trait and 1 other trait.
So I'm thinking Cleric, melee if we play it standard, and Cleric/Fighter if we go gestault. Likely dwarf. Maybe elf. We'll see.
Just an FYI: I have no idea if Anthorg will or will not allow gestalt.
I am fine either way, as I just really wanna play Rise.
However, they did say 'anything else was up to me', so I figured I would at least open the discussion.
If they come in here and say 'no way, ya crazy monkey', that is completely fine.
I will likely also be playing a Varisian native, though possibly a halfling for race. Otherwise, a Varisian human.
Chiming in to focus the discussion.
I really do mean anything else is up to Monkeygod, and I find it's cool that he wants to discuss it with other interested players.
You are right that gestalt rules would give me more work. But if that's what floats the (final) party's boat, then that's how we'll work. In short, take the part that you decide everything other than what I specified to the letter. I'll only veto anything if there's anything blatantly trying to break the game.
Just an FYI: I have no idea if Anthorg will or will not allow gestalt.
Chiming in to focus the discussion.
I really do mean anything else is up to Monkeygod, and I find it's cool that he wants to discuss it with other interested players
We really appreciate both of you putting this together.
As for me, I've never played RoRL, I'd be happy with a 15 pt buy and core races and classes to get the opportunity to play it.
Not that I wouldn't put together a character if it was gestalt or anything else; but my focus is playing a well thought out character through the game, not the funkiest min-max monster I can put together.
Concept: Ulfen Brawler/Unchained Summoner. A Wrath of the Righteous backstory of being a NG magical demon-punching hero who Mythically sacrificed some of his goodness and took on some Chaos to enter a familiar pact with, and partially redeem away from Evil, an aspect of a Qlippoth Lord (who had been bound into an unchanging quasit form by conquering Demon Lords and cursed to eternally serve masters until their deaths). Eventually things blew up magically and he and his "familiar" ended up where this game begins. Time travel and fighting his own mirror universe evil twin might have been involved.
This character was my first non-PFS character. She was made for a ROTRL game that died as soon as we hit level two. The character was a lot of fun to play and I’d like a chance to finish playing through ROTRL. She’s a Dawnflower Dervish Bard so Dex based melee damage, mobile, lots of skills and buff spells. Not sure what I’d gestalt her with, since bards are already a hybrid-like class but I could certainly figure something out.
1) Gestalt is great.
2,3,4) I’m addicted to skills and all of these satisfy that addiction.
|
I'm definitely interested.
1) I am open to gestalt or not, though I have found that with gestalt it is often best to keep party size smaller (3-4)
2) Background skills are great
3) Someone earlier mentioned story feats, I think they fit great here and have wanted to use them previously but never found it to be worth the slot so I'd be interested
4) number of traits I don't really care all that much about.
We are losing our Gm to our RotRL game. We will finish out book one and then be without a GM. We have some good players and would not mind finding a GM and a few more players to join us. As far as I know we only have two players left in the game that want to stick around.
If a Gm would like to pick up the game and continue on with Book 2...That would be great. I ask this because it is rare to get through a book and I would hate to start over from the beginning after playing this character for so long.
1) I like Gestalt. It's fun. 15 point buy does seem a bit low for gestalt. Don't go for a MAD build, I guess.
2) Background skills are basically a default for m. I forget they're even optional.
3) More feats is always good.
4) More traits is always good.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok then, Monkey...
You've seen the comments. Heard our thoughts. What's the word? What are the rules that we should be following in setting up characters so you and Anthorg can choose a team?
I've given my personal character creation suggestions,
However, I am curious if any of you all have any you would like to suggest? I see no reason why this can't be a team effort.
Since they got mostly positive responses, and Anthorg didn't object to any of the, assume all of my initial suggestions + Anthorg's limits are the current character creation rules.
Does anybody have anything they would like to add on?
I’m a fan of Automatic Bonus Progression. It allows (well, forces) more interesting magic item choices for PC’s.
Also, crafting is usually impossible because the PC’s rarely have months of downtime. There are various homebrew rule systems to make crafting feasible. I can look through them later and post suggestions if people are interested.
I’d use the Elephant in the Room feat tax elimination system. It really opens up space for non-combat feats when you don’t absolutely have to take power attack, weapon finesse, etc at the early levels. Allows for a more flavorful build. Automatic Bonus Progression, mentioned above, can be nice too. Again, by eliminating the “big six” stat-boosting items and magic weapons & armor, it frees up gold and slots for more flavorful items.
I am in support of eliminating feat taxes.
ABP: I have not played with automatic bonus progression, but i am familiar with it, and dont mind that.
Other questions I'd have would be starting HP, and wealth.
Full HD at 1st and half+1 every level are standard in my game. (And most games ive come across)
Im fine with average starting wealth, but if you wanted to shake that up a bit with some rolls you could.
Lots of things here so far are going to make the first few levels significantly easier if played in combination. (Not necessarily a bad thing, simply an observation.)
On the "unchained classes" only - could we have some reasonable exceptions to it, assuming the GM accepts? For example - I'm thinking on a tetori monk. Unchained monks can't use this archetype, unless we do some adaptation (I'm okay with adapting it if the GM prefers, or using the regular version of the monk).
I'd say ABP and the Elephant in the Room feat tax system would be excellent additions.
Automatic bonus progression sounds good for less of a Christmas tree and more of a sword and sorcery feel.
So, I'm excited for the prospect of this game so I'm moving ahead with building a dwarven, gestalt Cleric/Fighter of Torag.
Obviously, this will be the rough draft, and open to modification and editing as the specifics of the game are decided.
Anyone else?
ABP + Feat Tax + Gestalt would certainly lead to some very mechanically unique characters.
Ok, I'll confess, I was hoping we'd go real basic so we had less people applying. But like Plastic Dragon, I'm excited for the prospect of the game so I'm building a character as well.
A Lyrune-Quah (The Moon Clan) bloodrager taking the monster hunter trait, and if we gestalt he'll add oracle with the lunar mystery.
@You’d be surprised Robert Henry - Gestalt and ABP make this a definite avoid. True, Core-only can be an optionless drag, but give me a basic Fighter and I can game. Throw in Gestalt and ABP and my brain starts to melt.
@You’d be surprised Robert Henry - Gestalt and ABP make this a definite avoid. True, Core-only can be an optionless drag, but give me a basic Fighter and I can game. Throw in Gestalt and ABP and my brain starts to melt.
Never thought about it that way...
Don't get me wrong, I like Gestalt, feat tax and ABP especially, just hoping to get in the game :)
Never considered that point either.
I'm usually a Core-based player. Maybe I'll stick with a dwarven cleric to start with and gestalt him if the powers that be deem we head that way. :D
dotting for possible interest.
Gestalt interests me...everything else is cool.
what level? i might have missed that
Starting at 1st.
What about VMC? Between the feat tax rules, the bonus feat, and being able to gestalt in a class with bonus feats, I figure I’ll have some to burn on picking up alternate class features. But at the same time, Gestalt and VMC may get a bit silly.
I'd say ABP and the Elephant in the Room feat tax system would be excellent additions.
Heh, I consider these to be pretty much standard, so I totally forgot about them, lol.
Let's add these to the rest of the rules, and call it good? I don't really see any other posts calling for other rules to be added.
|
|
how about we consolidate the rules? make it easier for people.
That said, I'm going to wait to see what others play, as I have 3 different ideas.
1. Goblin alchemist/probably boltace (first preference)
2. Kellid Barbarian/martial artist monk (chained monk, idk if martial artist works with unchained?)
3. Magus(black blade)/Rogue(possible eldritch scoundrel)
I'd say ABP and the Elephant in the Room feat tax system would be excellent additions.
Heh, I consider these to be pretty much standard, so I totally forgot about them, lol.
Let's add these to the rest of the rules, and call it good? I don't really see any other posts calling for other rules to be added.
So have we set races?