Not signed in (Sign In)
This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.
    • CommentAuthorIsaacSher
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2011
     (10027.61)
    My gaming group is currently running a D&D 4th Edition game, using the Eberron setting (though with some tweaks). The GM is running the game as a combination of High Fantasy and Detective Noir, but with other genres added for spice. For example, we recently had to deal with a Lovecraftian undersea city (and prevent the release of an Elder Deity), and there's a murder mystery currently afoot on the giant paddleboat we're traveling on, complete with an insufferable gnomish detective NPC who's patterned off of Hercule Poirot. My character's a Warforged Swordmage who's quite fun to play, and acts as the group's tank.

    I also have my own D&D setting I'm working on, detailed here in the Wizards of the Coast forums:

    http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/27679369/Adventures_In_Worldbuilding

    I'm very happy with the games I've fun in this setting so far -- it's great for high adventure, and as I add detail to the world, it makes for a fun canvas for thoughts about, of all things, sociological and theological theory. I know it sounds odd to say it like that, but my players have really enjoyed the setting so far, so things are going well.
    •  
      CommentAuthoremonster
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2011
     (10027.62)
    Has anyone played Pathfinder?
    How is it different from D&D 3.5?
    •  
      CommentAuthorLazarus99
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2011 edited
     (10027.63)
    It's essentially D&D 3.75...

    I'm currently playing an epic D&D 3.5 campaign (called "Die with Honour", so you get the idea) which has turned into a "Mode Zero-Sum" (I think that's what it's called) game - that is, rather than the DM just being the PCs' eyes and ears as well as playing the NPCs, he is actively trying to kill us...however, as we are well aware of this, we've had to munchkin out the rules and most of our characters (well, mine at least) are essentially unkillable (I love Deathless Frenzy - yes, I'm a Barbarian/Frenzied Berserker...and now that I'm epic, a Legendary Dreadnought too). Essentially a bit of a mindless dungeon-bash, which is fun (most of the time)...
    •  
      CommentAuthorravnos
    • CommentTimeJul 19th 2011
     (10027.64)
    Pathfinder, broken down to the main basic difference, is D&D 3.5 with MORE rules for people who don't like 4.0

    That's it.
  1.  (10027.65)
    I'm in a Vampire game right now that may just become my first multisession game that doesn't peter out in the middle. (I was really sad not to continue the old d'n'd game where I had a scarred-up Eladrin who was, at time of game drop, carrying around a head in a sack - I wanted to come up with a creative use for it. That was also the one with a tentacle monster made of ribbons. Yup.)

    Anyway, my Vampire game is basically a mix of old and new WOD, on account of Old having better fluff but New having more room to invent stuff due to lack ofmeta plot (according to the GM, I've never played any of it before). The game is set in our own city, which is fun, because players can argue with the GM about e.g. whether a particular location has cover or not. My character is vaguely Holmesian - or was meant to be, I've been slacking off on the Deduction since my main useful skill in this campaign appears to be the two points I took in Computer. "Okay, we need to know how persons X and Y are related to each other. Maggie, roll for Google-fu!" (The ~plot involves hunters fucking with the Morotrophian's stranglehold on the juvenile delinquent institution business, which funnels convenient "blood donors" to the rest of the vampires, and my party being assigned to stop them. It feels really weird to play the bad guys!)

    But yep, she was a med school drop out cooking up drugs in her apartment and playing the violin a lot in the middle of the night, and then she got vamped by the Ordo Drakul, specifically by an Annunaku, which is apparently a super-territorial clan because this one basically just wanted a research assistant who could follow people around for him while he chilled in Penrith. This means my character had to be a Gangrel (the GM chose our sires/clans for us), which is basically defined as "The Beast is strong in this one", so I get minuses on intelligence rolls to represent my inner horrible monster growling for blood in my ear. Which is ironic since the Ordo Drakul is the Amoral Vampires FOR SCIENCE!!! group.

    And the reason I think this one might last is that the GM has taken to punishing surprise no-shows by doing horrible things to their characters (to be fair, he gives them XP for it). So far we've had one of our party staked, kidnapped, replaced with explosives and hung up in a tree for us to collect. It was awesome!
    •  
      CommentAuthorAlan Tyson
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2011
     (10027.66)
    "replaced with explosives"

    ...I think that one requires a bit of explanation. Story time!
    •  
      CommentAuthorravnos
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2011
     (10027.67)
    Interesting.

    I've always been very, very against the GM haven't ANY control over character creation (other than the basic "you start at this level/whatever," and approving unusual things (I'm going to start off as this because I'm taking this and this" sort of thing)). So the the whole GM picking your starting sire/clan irks me quite a bit. I can understand slightly if none of you have ever played Vampire before, but my opinion on that has always been to hand the player the stack of books and say "start reading" lol.

    Sounds like an amusing game, and I like your GM's response to no-shows.
    I use a similar tactic when someone in my game does something blatantly stupid just to piss off/annoy the other players, which is usually to have a bus fall on them from the sky. Even when they are in a sewer.
  2.  (10027.68)
    I'm okay with the ST deciding some things, and that's both as a player and as an ST. For example, in oWoD, everyone plays the same clan, like All-Tremere, or All-Setite; and in nWoD, where everyone plays the same faction, like an all Lancea Sanctum game. But in a case like that, I imagine the ST would say, "Hey do you guys want to play all in the same sect? I've got a great idea for an all Ordo Dracul game..."

    Also, with some new players, I've known more than a few that just hit a block. With so many options to choose from, I've gone through character creation holding someone's hand, and telling them that certain ideas were not good ones because I thought they'd have a hard time starting out playing certain things. But then again, newbies are the lifeblood of gaming; without them we just play the same old shit over and over.

    With some of my veteran players, I've gotten more involved with their chargen as well, disallowing someone to play a Toreador, after, like, 15 different Toreador characters. Or, not letting someone play Sabbat again. Making that Malkavian guy try something different for once. But somehow, they still end up playing it as a Malkavian. *shudder*

    All in all, you have to work with your players, and you don't want to take away their fun; you do want them to try new things every once in a while. It's important to maintain that balance.
    •  
      CommentAuthorravnos
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2011
     (10027.69)
    Oh I definitely agree with you in some aspects. When you have a specific idea for a game, it's great. I've played in plenty of "no-magic" or "all monster race PC" D&D games. In Vampire I've also ran games where I didn't allow Tremere (because they were the penultimate bad guys in that game) but I checked with the players first.
    And holding a newbies hand during character creation is par for the course... I even have some veteran players who are terrible at creating characters and I have to help them... (*sigh*) but that's guidance, not control, to me.

    I guess it's more of a guidance/encouraging a player to try something new VS. "you have to do this this way because it's how I set it up" thing for me. Or at least it feels that way.
  3.  (10027.70)
    Man, I haven't managed to get into Google+, but I'm seriously considering getting back into gaming again... I might start looking at running some Mortal: the Screaming again.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAlan Tyson
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2011
     (10027.71)
    Do it, govspy! We can trade notes on how we've managed to screw with our player's heads!
    •  
      CommentAuthorravnos
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2011 edited
     (10027.72)
    Heh, count me in on that. I can starting taking notes during my current NWoD/CoC game.


    On the other note... I'd probably be interested in some G+ Hangout gaming. I need to get a webcam though. But I think I'd probably be down for that. I know you said the group is already the size you want, but if anyone else wanted in on that and spoke too late, let me know. we should organize a second group.
  4.  (10027.73)
    Generally, I agree with Ravnos about character creation, however it really depends. I have a game waiting for a moment when I have a group and time to run it set in Victorian Scotland where I pre-rolled all the characters. The players are only going to get a list of archetypes and they get to pick their top three. From there I will do my best to give them all their top choice. Of course, it's a mystery and they all know pieces of it and have reasons not to share, so some of the fun will be in how they decide to progress. Plus some of the characters are related, which adds an interesting dynamic and isn't really something people tend to do when rolling up characters.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAlan Tyson
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2011
     (10027.74)
    I tend to let my players go fairly wild with their characters, but I do require that they give explanations (or, as I like to call them, Plot Fuel) for anything out of the ordinary. "Why is a Silver Ladder mage slumming it with a bunch of Free Council hippies?" "How's a kid from the suburbs have three dots in Firearms?" "How does your catholic priest werewolf reconcile his spiritual faith with his knowledge of actual spirits?" From such scrambling attempts to answer questions come brand-new character traits and plot bunnies. It's fun.
    •  
      CommentAuthorravnos
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2011
     (10027.75)
    The only time I ever had more than a guiding hand in character creation was one D&D game where I created everyone's characters based off of the players personality. It was highly entertaining, and done mostly as a gag. They thought it was great fun though. Especially when the 120 lbs soaking wet guy was a barbarian...
  5.  (10027.76)
    if there's a second group wanting to do some nWoD I'd be down for a G+ hangout thing. Someone else has to ST though, cuz I'm tired of storytelling, it's all I've ever done, I've played all of 2 games in 15 years of gaming.
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2011
     (10027.77)
    Pathfinder is awesome if you liked 3.5. If you didn't, you'll hate it.
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeJul 20th 2011
     (10027.78)
    I've just picked up the rules for a game called Don't Rest Your Head. The premise of the game is that you are an insomniac for whatever reason and you eventually reach the point in your fatigue that your consciousness clicks over to something else and you start seeing the other reality of dreams and nightmares that exists on ours. Reaching this state, where you're really Awake, you are able to do amazing feats at the cost of potentially becoming so exhausted you slip into sleep, making you vulnerable to Nightmares, or madness.

    Also ordered the GM's guide and players handbook for Deadlands: Reloaded and can't wait to see what they did with the rules.
    •  
      CommentAuthorravnos
    • CommentTimeJul 21st 2011
     (10027.79)
    I was looking at DRYH a few weeks ago and it looked pretty interesting. Please let us know more about it once you get a chance to read more/play.

    I'm not big on Pathfinder, and 3.5 is my preferred "version" of D&D, but it's mostly because I don't feel Pathfinder really adds anything to the game, or at least doesn't add anything to the game that my friends and I haven't/couldn't come up with on our own, without having to shell out more money for an even thicker corebook. Might just be me though.
    •  
      CommentAuthoremonster
    • CommentTimeJul 21st 2011
     (10027.80)
    Thanks for all the Pathfinder input. We are going to go for it.
    We had a really fun 3.5 game that went for many years. Been playing Call of Cthulhu too long. We're in the mood to fight some monsters rather than running from them, crying, and being driven insane.

This discussion has been inactive for longer than 5 days, and doesn't want to be resurrected.