|
Post by Cadic's Devoted on Aug 14, 2010 9:50:48 GMT -5
James & Joe.
Since we can't ever seem to all be on together when my internet ISNT being retarded (Aka when i'm not at work, lol). I thought it would be prudent to start a thread for us to discuss things on the game we have been talking about.
Since its going to be a round robin sort of thing, I figure the best way to tie it all in (As we discussed) is to have all the characters be member's of a sort of organization for adventurer's. Cliche, but it works.
Otherwise, its mostly just a matter of figuring out how we want to do this. Are we all going to use the same system? Does it matter? I know me and James were talking about we're both looking at running our sessions via standard D&D. Joe, I know you like AQ, would you be looking at running in AQ? And if so, where can I get some info on it, such as rules, how to play, classes, etc. As I have never played.
Thoughts and comments please. I'd like to get this started, it sounds fun.
|
|
|
Post by joelocaust on Aug 14, 2010 17:12:12 GMT -5
I don't think an organization is necessary, and I'll tell you why. The cool thing about AQ (and this general style of game-play moreso than the system) is that the characters encounter different people every game scenario. That being said, I wouldn't be averse to each of us having more than one character to play, no matter what system we pick. That would be fun and keep games fresh in more way than one. Of course, it also gives us the option to run bigger games (i.e. we play multiple chars) OR have synergies. I know one of my chars back in the day didn't even go on games if certain people weren't there (for better or for worse). But it would be cool to have The Rancor and Sabatto team up and then watch Dio and Shadow team up the next week. Follow that up with Vice and Raz. Obviously not those characters, but the dynamic change. I feel like we could even have a character at two or three different tiers of power (which could be indicated by what the GM wanted to run, I.E. Tiers 1 and 2 accepted, Tier 3+, etc.) I don't care what system we play, I just would like to see it be point-buy system or something equally incrementable. I guess I just like instant gratification in one-shot games. The aq manual is now online at: centralia.aquest.com/AQManual.pdfIf you skim through it and like what you see, we can try it. Mainly take a look at the elemental spells, priesthoods, and skills. All the other stuff is fluff (the world, monsters, NPCs, boat descriptions, and even the majority of the priest descriptions), and I would encourage everybody to craft their own world as we went (one big facet of the system is interdimensional travel, allowing for us to end up anywhere from modern earth to Mario World). SUMMARILY: Multiple characters? What system? I will play whatever, I don't want to hassle you guys with learning AQ. That being said, AQ is always my first choice because I can easily give out character-unique skills (The Rancor can learn Shouting, Sabatto could get Blur-Casting, Vice could get Gore, etc.).A central structure or freelance mercs/adventurers? Same level or slightly/greatly different? Checks/balances? At any point, I feel like we should respect a vote to amend a skill/item given out in case it's too good. In case more people join, it's simple majority, with respect. A draw would result in the giver 'reworking' the item slightly.Thanks guys, I'm excited about it regardless! If you have any questions about the AQ stuff, just ask me.
|
|
|
Post by joelocaust on Aug 14, 2010 17:23:09 GMT -5
There's a bonus spell group that was designed to make Earth Mages more kickass at this link too: www.megaupload.com/?d=YCS2AZPSI guess that's another quick note about AQ, a person is allowed to "research" abilities/magic. You just pay 3x the cost and get all of us to approve it, and then you can learn it. That's how this came about.
|
|
|
Post by Cadic's Devoted on Aug 14, 2010 18:49:41 GMT -5
The amusing thing is that I found that exact link just after posting last night that I needed info about AQ. lol. Yay google when you type the right search parameters.
I see your point about an organization not being necessary. Makes more sense too. I don't see anyone like Vice and Sabatto being members of the same organization, though I can potentially (Though its a bit iffy) see them working together if needed.
I also agree that we should respect any sort of vote on changing skills/items. While the DM is god, in this sort of game, where a character might be pulled to be played in another DMs game, we should attempt to respect some semblance of balance between us, even if only our own twisted sense. lol. And an amendment to that. A tie would result in the 'giver' reworking the item slightly, and resubmitting for a vote.
Definately multiple characters. I like the idea of being able to pull whoever or whatever I feel like playing at a given time. I should also think we could pull from archived characters of ours. Give some of our old characters new life, as long as they play well into the DMs given level.
As for the AQ stuff..... its alot to digest. That manual is 500+ pages, and it seems very complicated (Not saying regular D&D isnt complicated, I just already know how it works... lol). I'd be willing to give it a swing if you wanted to run it in AQ. I still think though that at the very least, my sessions would be run in Standard D&D, as I don't see myself feeling comfortable enough with AQ for a long time to be able to run it.
As for the level thing, I would say that whatever the DM of the session is playing towards would be the level described. I see us each having several characters in the works for this game. I do suggest though that no single character is played at multiple levels. As in, I don't make a level 5 Sabatto and a Level 19 Sabatto and play them independantly. I see it being more rewarding if each character works his way up the ranks from whatever base level they started at.
I too am really excited to see this get off the ground. It sounds like its gonna be alot of fun.
|
|
The Lord of Blades
Game Masters
Ero Sennin
Please allow me to introduce myself: I'm a man of wealth and taste
Posts: 1,314
|
Post by The Lord of Blades on Aug 15, 2010 3:43:37 GMT -5
What if instead of a point-buy, we did it in a sort of "amount of games to level-up"? What I mean is, say we all start with level 4 characters: past that it takes two games to level per level until 10. Then it takes three games per level to hit 15, then four games to level to hit 20. Of course, this is subject to change as it is only tentative, but it rewards consistent character use while allowing them to acquire special 'perks' of their own as well.
As for those perks themselves, while I know what you mean about AQ making it easy, I've never found it to be overly difficult to bestow them in D&D as well. Obviously I would be running in D&D since I know it about a thousand times better than AQ, my situation being the same as Nick's roughly... but I would not be opposed to you running yours in AQ if you wanted (though I'd need to spend some time learning it and you'd have to help walk me through character creation and whatnot).
As far as multiple characters... I imagine start with maybe one or two level 4 and maybe one level 10? That way people have options regarding what kind of game level to run. I also agree with running 'suggested level' games and support 'suggested class' games as well. Let's you know who better to take with you.
Anyways, yeah, I'm eager to get this one going as well, just need to iron out some more details.
Also, I'm good if we make use of separate universes from game to game. I do like that about AQ that you can just hop through a portal and be into a new 'area'. It reduces all the nonsense of 'feasibility' and travel-times and all that. I'm a big fan of that and it'll let us keep our games pretty fresh. Oh, and you guys are welcome to pick the name of this particular overall "game". I'm not too concerned and you two seem to be much more of a driving force at the moment (given I'm running two games [technically three], and helping Max out with his. lol)
|
|
|
Post by joelocaust on Aug 15, 2010 22:41:47 GMT -5
Alright. Let's do this:
We each make 2-3 D&D chars. I vote for a lvl 5 char, a lvl 9 char, and then one more of any level 1-9 if you want. I also think, if anybody is at all interested, we should roll up an AQ char a piece, just a simple Rate 5 character (each rate = 2500 exp). I can post a few sample chars so you get the idea, if anybody is interested. AQ is pretty easy once you see it, I'll admit the rule book is inflated, overwHelming, and silly. My synopsis of the rules is much quicker/easier. Again, if it's something worth pursuing, I'll post that too. I'm not gonna do it though in case people really care. Three chars would already be a lot.
|
|
The Lord of Blades
Game Masters
Ero Sennin
Please allow me to introduce myself: I'm a man of wealth and taste
Posts: 1,314
|
Post by The Lord of Blades on Aug 16, 2010 21:11:48 GMT -5
Well, I think we should each come up with a game 'hook' for our adventuring board so our characters can check it out. I mean, I don't mind coming up with multiple characters, but I'd need to know DM specific stuff from either of you. I can't just wing it on stats, allowed classes/races, and starting gold. I think we should set a universal standard for D&D roll-ups or AQ roll-ups regarding stat generation and the like. I'd probably opt for 6 rolls of 4d6 rerolling ones for D&D characters with standard level starting gold and base races available until maybe earning some perks for new characters later. That also adds some replay value if you can get the perk of unlocking say... creating a half-dragon character... from a game, because then you have a reason to reroll or create more characters rather than just always go with your strongest. Just an idea, lemme know what you guys think.
So uh, I'll probably roll up two adventures, one higher, one lower, and post both the hooks later on in an OOC thread that we can use as our 'job board'. and yeah, I'm stealing that from AQ and from Fairy Tail, but I don't really care because I think it'd work out nicely that way.
|
|
|
Post by joelocaust on Aug 16, 2010 21:22:13 GMT -5
I think unlocking books/classes/races would be a nice prize option as a quest result. Good thinking.
For starters, I'd ask for base races and classes, but then again, I'm bored with most standard D&D stuff at this point so I don't care. Another advantage of AQ, you can play class-less style (i.e. all skills cost base cost, so you develop the skills you need/want with no gimping based on "Well, my spellsword saves more exp if he's a mage first"). Not applicable here, but maybe something to consider later (I can take Paladin and Barb or something).
So, roll a lvl 3-6 char, and a lvl 7-10 char, using standard roll-up procedure (4d6 reroll ones. Max HP. I'd personally prefer good ol' 4d6). As for changing race later on, I'm down to steal yet another page from AQ and say you can pay a mage to body-swap you. Downsides: it costs you money and you reroll physical (STR, DEX, CON) stats, Upsides: you keep your char and get to change races.
I'ma start rolling up two chars. I feel like only one person should post hooks at a time, and we should have to play the person's game. That way we don't have a 3-way tie since people can't vote for themselves (can't be on their own game). Yet ANOTHER page from AQ, I say the GM gets EXP for whichever of their chars they want for running a game in the amount that they distribute (and let's be reasonable about that). Also, a GM can't ever have one of their items in their character's possession. Prevents feeding yourself goodies ("I swear I didn't know my lvl 10 guy would show up and down that lvl 3 guy I just gave a Vorpal too...").
|
|
The Lord of Blades
Game Masters
Ero Sennin
Please allow me to introduce myself: I'm a man of wealth and taste
Posts: 1,314
|
Post by The Lord of Blades on Aug 16, 2010 23:29:05 GMT -5
On the cycling GM, I agree, though I don't know if the exp for running thing is entirely necessary, provided it cycles a-ok then it should balance out anyways. Besides, if we're going to use exp-classic, then this isn't gonna work anyways because one campaign might give more exp than another. I stand by my idea regarding X games equals a level to keep it nice and fluid. Besides, without the XP for GM'ing plan you still have people only being one adventure behind the others provided we alternate. Speaking of alternating... what would the order be? Dibs on not-first since I'll be moving back to school at the end of this month.
I'm going to have to nix body-swapping, at least in D&D. There's transformation magic enough in that and I think it'd be silly to have your character suddenly become a halfdragon instead of a halfling. Maybe as a perk (or a curse!) from a quest, but not as a pay-to-receive thing. Statswise I'm groovy with D&D characters being rolled 4d6-reroll ones with a set of 6 rolls and max HP.
For initial books how about we go by Dungeon Master's Guide and Player's Handbook only for rolling up characters (obviously GMs/DMs can have anything they want to use), with access to other books being available later from various things. Obviously it might work better to make specific things more available from specific purposes, but I think if we keep it too closely-guarded then we'll quickly wear out what classes are available to us.
Lastly, I have no idea what you're talking about having a GM have items in their character's possession. What... do you mean like: "Okay, I'm the GM, so I give my character who isn't there an awesome sword."? How would that even come up? I was under the impression when you were running your characters were off elsewhere. Like, you can't even have them NPC their way along in the game.
|
|
|
Post by Cadic's Devoted on Aug 17, 2010 0:30:08 GMT -5
I agree with the Unlocking classes/books/whatever would be awesome quest rewards. Really good thinking.
I like the idea of getting xp when you run, but I don't know about the getting full thing. I would say it would work well with something like AQ where you might feasibly get stuck running several times in a row, but I don't see that happening considering we will be alternating on a regular basis. Everyone gets plenty of play time.
I'm gonna go with James with the no body-swapping for a fee thing. Maybe as a reward or something occassionally, but not something you can just buy.
I also don't think the item thing will matter, as we won't be playing in our own games so we can't give our own characters shit anyway.
After talking with James, and considering it, I'm leaning towards the X games/level method too. If, for example, all of James's games end up being really high end XP givers, while say all of my games end up distributing fairly low XP (on accident obviously), then my characters would level at a higher rate (As im playing in High xp games), while James would be left behind. The number of games per level fixes that.
When you say one level 3-6 and another 7-10 are we picking an actual level in there? or just whatever you feel like? lol.
I agree with the PHB and DMG only to start with. Keep it to the basics. Expand as we go.
I would say base Gold for your level as per page 135 of the DMG.
Also, something I've been meaning to post for a while. Rather than having multiple threads, with each thread being a character, I say we have 1 thread and each post within that thread is another character. Easier to keep things in one spot, rather than spamming the boards with tons of characters.
|
|
|
Post by joelocaust on Aug 17, 2010 11:58:06 GMT -5
Oh yeah, mos def one thread. I think I'll make one of the posts on the first page, since both you guys can mod my posts. That way, that post will just read, "Joe's Games on Pages: 2-3, 8-10, 15-18" etc. and we can all update it as games change.
X games/lvl is fine with me. I always disregard exp values in a book anyway (you killed 3 goblins, but I had fun, so gain a level). I don't see the disconnect in understanding the GM xp thing though. Whoever runs first will always be behind otherwise. Plus, if you have a character that needs to be lvl X before you can play them properly, it gives you a way to feed them without suffering through games, albeit gradual (if it takes 3 games to level, it would take 3 games of running, which is more like 9 because we rotate, to feed somebody a level).
The item ownership thing works thusly: Joe: "Congrats, Nick and James find a +18 Vorpal Longsword that requires you be an elf." Nick & James: "Awesome...we aren't elves." James: "I'll hold onto it." Next game - Nick: "Joe and James enter the bar looking for the employer." Joe: "My elf-fighter full-attacks James." Get my exaggerated point?
The level range is because I like variance. I don't mind rolling up a level 3 guy and questing with a level 10 guy. You know how much trickier that makes EVERYBODY'S game? I guess I just like a challenge. I'm going to join games based on which character would go on them, not level (unless you tell me it's all combat and I WILL die).
As for body-swapping, yeah, it's not a reroll whenever you have the money thing. It's not a stroll down the street and just get a new body thing either. I was just talking about the in-game excuse for when you get the option to switch a race because you unlocked something. I'm ok just handwaving it though.
|
|
|
Post by Cadic's Devoted on Aug 17, 2010 14:56:39 GMT -5
Alright Joe, you confused me on the One thread bit. I was talking something like this.
I post a thread in the Character Approvals forum and I name the thread "[Game] Nick's Characters". The first post in that thread is my level 4 character. I then make a second post in that thread and it is my level 8 character. Everycharacter that I make thereafter is another post within that thread. Each of us do that independantly.
Thats what I meant.
And yeah I get your exaggerated point. lol.
And we are making 2 characters at this point, yes? Are we also making an AQ character, or what? Im confused on what got decided on that point. Are you running your sessions in AQ or in D&D joe?
|
|
|
Post by joelocaust on Aug 17, 2010 16:03:30 GMT -5
Ahh, I meant for our actually different quests, we still put them all in one thread. I agree with the one-thread-characters though.
You can make as many chars as you want, imo. I think 2, one around 5ish and one around 10ish. I am not going to run AQ since no one seemed enthused about it.
|
|
|
Post by Cadic's Devoted on Aug 17, 2010 16:20:27 GMT -5
Also, I think I came up with a name that seems to suit the game well. "The Adventurer's Board"
A bit lame, I know, but I thought it fit well. Let me know if you guys think of anything better.
And gimme some time to look over the AQ stuff joe... Its kind of intriguing, its just ALOT of information..... I wouldn't mind giving it a try after I have time to sift through it and figure out how it works.
|
|
|
Post by Cadic's Devoted on Aug 19, 2010 22:13:57 GMT -5
Also, a few things. One, I don't see myself getting the time to look over the AQ stuff any earlier than late next week or the week after. I am in the process of moving currently, and will be hard pressed for time as it is. Second, any thoughts on who will be running the first session? I can start planning one if you guys want, but like I said, it might be a few weeks before we get started. Only reason I've gotten my characters done is because i've had some free time at work.
Anyway, thats all for now folks.
|
|