I have only four days a week to reliably post, two of those days being the weekend, Thursdays through Sundays.
I’m looking to run a game with some homebrew rules, modifications to the 3.5/pf1 mechanics. It is much more on the gritty and low end, though higher stuff does exist, it just won’t be six weeks of skyrocketing to demigod status, rather PCs gain skill more than world changing power. I also altered magic to be more costly, less reliable, and while slots exist they are not required.
It will also be in my homebrew setting Azoria the Recreation. Very NOT cookie cutter, but with room most of the common stuff.
But from there, the question is what do there. I can center on dungeon delving, or an academy campaign, or just a general sandbox game. I could probably fit most APs or modules somewhere in my setting, but I don’t own any except half of hell’s rebels. I do have all of the season six pfs scenerios which I can adapt to my setting.
So I’m putting out a call to see what kind of game might attract the most interest.
Perhaps I'm the odd bird (put money on it) but character generation and building a well rounded capable character is most important to me.
If I am allowed to build the character I love, any adventure where they can utilize their skills is golden.
Not demigod status, but renaissance man/woman.
Higher point buy, elephant in the room, multi-classing or even gestalt. Access to the new Paizo material. Starting at level 4 seems to be the sweet spot for me.
I have a question for you! It's there a specific AP or module you'd like to get your hands on?
Happy to gift the modules as you need them. No strings attached. Don't even need to select me in recruitment.
Advice, nothing kills a game faster than ambiguity in what's encountered. This usually comes during investigation, usually in the form of player uncertainty.
Many players will tend to freeze. Game stalls. DM gets frustrated.
I’m a big supporter of player creativity in character building. I noticed the 3.5 DMG advice on adapting classes uniquely for specific PC concepts and support that idea.
That said, the mechanics I am going with here focuses more on skills and makes skills out of things that used to not be, such as combat rolls and magic.
In a normal game of 3.5/pf1, characters generally run lvl 1 to about 20, but I shifted things so a similar campaign runs about 80 to 100 levels, but only about 15 class levels of abilities and only about 5 lvls worth of raw numerical power (of course, in my mind such characters should be able to run several APs rather than a single AP be their journey to demigodhood). Keeps feats at every third level though, so characters gain about 30 feats over that time.
You might notice however, that it does trend towards the gritty realism scope of power with a normal 4th lvl character being towards the end of an AP campaign.
If you’ve ever read Alexandrian’s Calibrating your Expectations, that’s how I treat the mechanics, with a normal lvl 5 being the peak of real world human ability, and I adapted things to get more progression and breadth of skills while staying below that peak of real world human ability.
That said, since I split Power into it’s own stat, you could easily use my mechanics to start as fresh characters at whatever tier of play you wanted, even playing brand new superheroes needing to figure out their powers.
As for APs, I’m willing to run them but I don’t really need them. I like Paizo’s stories, that’s definitely what I consider their strength to be, but I’m more interested in playing their APs than running them. I like running sandboxes in worlds of my design best, that’s my favorite way to run games. I like designing and building worlds and getting players to explore them.
Thus I wouldn’t turn down any APs offered, especially as it’s easier to find players for APs than sandboxes, I don’t really have any preferences for APs.
It is interesting that you should mention uncertainty in what will be encountered as a big turn off. A major part of the game in the old days was the unknown. PCs had to go scouting and make plans and most importantly always be prepared for the unexpected and expect to discover things with no advance notice. You can still see this in the design of older games, including the computer ones like Balduers gate 1, 2, and Dark Alliance. Honestly it is one of my favorite parts of the game.
In fact, in this setting, the Allmother created living dungeons, which have all kinds of variations in what can be found inside. You never know what you’ll encounter in a new dungeon, and the larger dungeons actually change and shift over time.
That said, there is some certainty that can be had, mainly that I go for more gritty and combat-as-war style play. I aim for medium lethality, I don’t want players running through entire stables of characters, but I do want the sense of danger and the expectation that characters can die from poor strategy, and most importantly that risk is actually risky.
A niche playstyle these days perhaps, but definitely among the reasons I won’t even touch 5e or pf2 with a 10’ pole.
So I’m guessing that while you might find plenty of character building opportunities here, I’m thinking it’ll be a lower power level than you like.
So I’m guessing that while you might find plenty of character building opportunities here, I’m thinking it’ll be a lower power level than you like.
On the contrary, I don't care much about power level. It's inconsequential.
I prefer starting at Level 4 because it gives me a chance to craft a well rounded (doesn't have to be powerful) multi-class character to start play with.
That avoids the need to RP in-game how or why they did so. It's just part of their backstory.
Also, discovering the unknown is wonderful. I agree with you.
The ambiguity in referring to is more ethical/moral in nature. Knowing who the bad guys are, who to trust - especially in overly social combat games.
Are we following trope or is the DM making an exception to prove a point?
Do we outright reject "evil" or must we ally with the lesser evil... they may betray us (that is to expected) but will I be forced to break my word, my honor and betray them or should I avoid the deal entirely?
That sort of thing.
Seems your playing a highly modified homebrew and I'm fine with that.
Hmm, I’ve never been good at the whole politics thing. I consider it my weak point as a GM. So I wouldn’t expect too many tricks with the whole “who to trust” thing.
That said, I also have been one to go for super simple morals either. NPCs have their own objectives, sometimes even an agenda. But I always run them from the NPC’s perspective, rather than metagaming some elaborate scheme around the players.
A noble might send the players somewhere for reasons they keep to themselves, sometimes with the expectation that the PCs might die, but you’ll get chances to notice something is off.
That said, I don’t really worry about what the tropes are, and have been blindsided occasionally by folks having expectations based on tropes that I knew nothing about, both as a GM and as player or even just a reader of a book or watching a movie.
Honestly though, I think I don’t care about tropes mostly because I don’t really like the idea of having expectations about how something will go for no reason other than it’s a story or genre or something like that.
As for breaking your word, I do not railroad and not have any expectations about such things.
In the real world, it is my belief that having a strict set of rules for behavior will inevitably have cases where following the rules undermines the reason for the rules, and therefore there will always be times to break the rules. This influences how I handle morals in the game.
Firstly, if you want to keep your word, there will always be a way to do so, but it won’t always be the best option.
Second, the particular setting I have has a strong aspect of personal power (evil) and team power (good) as two valid if incomplete philosophies according to the goddess the made and runs the world. Most ethical dilemmas will fall under that framework. It should also be noted that the goddess does not favor one over the other, but sees both as philosophies for the unenlightened that individuals should eventually rise above.
The Allmother and her philosophy, is LN. To her, the path of Good is a way to achieve power and success as a group, while the path of Evil is a way to achieve power and success as an individual, and both paths have important lessons and values. She teaches that these opposing paths are like fire and water, seemingly incompatible, but with proper understanding can be balanced and forged together into a wise and enlightened path which is both good and evil.
Evil here is less about monstrous evil that destroys for the sake of destruction (which I refer to as corruption), but more about acting in one’s own interest at the expense of others.
Thus bringing the two together is about acting both for one’s own interests as well as the interests of the group.
Some people might just call that good, but really, those of proper good alignment, put others first exclusively and do for themselves only when there is literally zero impact on others. Think the MC from Fruits Basket who went to live in the woods when she lost her home because she didn’t want to burden anybody else with even the knowledge of her difficulties because they might feel bad for her and be sad.
The lawful part of this is acting according to thought and reason rather than emotionally (which would be chaotic). Being pragmatic and machievellian is lawful, while acting purely on how one feels is chaotic. That doesn’t mean ignore emotions, just don’t let them interfere with decision making, often leading to putting duty ahead of desire etc.
There is a lot of pushing people to improve themselves and seek better lives, but it is left to people to find their own strategies and ways of balancing things to achieve success. Hence the dungeons which are dangerous things that are risky but which also provide materials and rewards that simply can’t be found elsewhere. Even her clergy are to be mentors and guides but never leaders. A good death is dying chasing something, while a bad death is dying running away from something (and not just a literal sense but a figurative sense).
In fact, the different races have sins, flaws that must be overcome, and related boons.
As for a solid storyline, that is part of why I am doing an interest check, so I can work around the kind of game players are wanting, whether it be to work an AP into my world, run a dungeon crawler, sandbox, or something else. Once I know what I can get a group for, then I can build the necessary storyline for it.
Here is the rough sketch of the rules I plan on using,
I am generally interested in any heroic campaign oriented game. Something that starts small and slowly builds into something greater. I stick with games until (and sometimes past) the GM.
That being said I also like to work with the GM and/or the other players to create something that fits well into the campaign and perhaps works very well (and maybe even knows) one or more of the other PCs from get go.
I am a roleplayer first and foremost so look for games where hopefully roleplaying is a strong element but can glide along with games of all sorts.
Just let me know what you would like to see specifically or more specifically than just anything and I work with you and the other players to hopefully build something solid and fun for all.
Just let me know what you would like to see specifically or more specifically than just anything and I work with you and the other players to hopefully build something solid and fun for all.
Well, if I make something hoping people will show up, then I’d run a semi-sandbox where players make PCs from the Delvers Guild, which also serves as a militia of sorts, and send them on missions, for which I can either make short stories or use modules and occasionally have dungeon delves.
That said, you mention “heroic” and I am aiming more gritty.
Herioc does not mean not gritty -- all it means is the group are ultimately meant to be the heroes of the campaign. Therefore they will mostly likely not contain purely evil PCs or murder hobos and the like. Which is to say every PC has some kind of redeeming element about them that makes them a hero type rather than a villain type.
So what do you mean by "more gritty" as that is very subjective.
Generally, 3.5/pf1 are considered to have four tiers of play, gritty is lvl 1-5, 6-10 or so is heroic tier (gets mentioned as heroic because that’s the tier paizo focuses on, and also was the inspiration for the E6 rules and such discussions near always explicitly call it the heroic tier), and I don’t remember what the other two are called but 15-20 us basically the superhero tier.
Most of the time someone says they want heroic play, they are referring to this second tier where characters have become superhuman (relative to the real world, like shows and movies and especially anime, where characters get thrown through walls and similar and merely feel pain rather than getting broken bones and probably dying like a real person would), and often also meaning a game where death is not really likely unless someone gets really unlucky or really stupid. Combat as sport is also often assumed.
And most of the time people mention gritty, they are meaning old school kind of play where players have stables of PCs at hand for the inevitable deaths (note the plural), and expect to play characters that are ordinary common people.
In the case of me, I’m aiming at something in the middle, but still very combat-as-war. I don’t want superhumans (I want higher levels to be borderline supernatural), nor do I want the game to be so deadly that players don’t put much effort in characterization but also not so lacking in death that players find their character dying as some kind of GM cruelty. I rather find this fits somewhere between, and combining, the gritty tier and the heroic tier.
Okay well as I stated to me gritty versus heroic has no teiring to it -- heroic to me is a style of play versus a level of play and in my book you can easily have a gritty heroic game -- just like they have gritty heroic books and movies from time to time.
So far it looks like you have only two folks that seem interested, are you needing more than two before you start the game or might you start it with as few as two?
Two is enough, more is better. Putting together a player’s guide. Also can only work on it four days a week, so probably the week after next for me to post the recruitment.
Hi, there! Popping in because I almost feel like what you're describing is very close to the style of games I used to play in with my old gaming group.
I'll be watching for your prospective recruitment. I'm very curious about your take on magic and PF source material you'll allow for chargen.
Alright, recruitment posted. I’m sure I missed something, so let me know of my folly.