In post 35, SleepyKrew wrote:How does everyone feel about player characters dying?
i think it's really easy to tell when the risk of death isn't there. even if it doesn't result in anyone dying the risk of dying keeps the game interesting. actions having consequences (including possibly death) seems a good thing
are you thinking of me when you're with somebody else?
As I'm offering to DM, I'll say, if the characters do objectively stupid things they might die (or if its narratively fitting and they want it for their character). I feel its important to have other consequences though. Me never seeking to kill my pcs doesn't mean they can't lose other things.
Last edited by chamber on Wed Jul 18, 2018 11:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
For my stuff, I was thinking about having my campaigns (are there 3 now? 4?!) be set in the same setting, with different parties having different starting levels. The parties wouldn't interact, and there would be no expectation of players following along with other campaigns. But only needing to create lore for one setting would make the DMing load a lot easier, which is why I think I could handle multiple games of 4-5 people. Each party's goals would be based on player desires and character backstories.
I would suggest at this point that people start /inning for either me (we will start at level 1) or Skrew (state a level preference? Not sure what he wants). And we can judge things from there.
"Do I have permission to....refute some of the bs that Inferno just spewed out?"--TywinL
“Does anyone know if Inferno is prone to going of on huge tangents of twisted logic regarding basically alignment neutral posting? Asking for a friend ...”—MagnaofIllusion
In post 73, chamber wrote:The demand for this seems really high so I've talked to SK and I'm going to throw my hat in as a DM. I'm looking to run a city centered campaign based on a 5e conversion (by me in real time as we run into it) of the pathfinder adventure path Curse of the Crimson Throne. The adventurers will start out being brought together to seek revenge against a local crime boss that has wronged them all in some way in the past. It will transition into a campaign where they will be offered options for quests at the local adventure's guild. Seeds for a greater narrative will be tied into some or most of the quests that the group choose to take. The setting will be high magic by 5e standards. Curse of the Crimson Throne originally is intended to run from first to 20th level. That could be quite a big time commitment so we might stop at another break point (perhaps as early as you getting revenge on the local crime boss.) dependent on how everyone is enjoying things.
is this campaign more intrigue-based? because I have a concept for an orc barbarian who is dumber than a rock and am not sure whether he would fit here
In post 86, McMenno wrote:
is this campaign more intrigue-based? because I have a concept for an orc barbarian who is dumber than a rock and am not sure whether he would fit here
So you’re turning James into DnD character then?
"Do I have permission to....refute some of the bs that Inferno just spewed out?"--TywinL
“Does anyone know if Inferno is prone to going of on huge tangents of twisted logic regarding basically alignment neutral posting? Asking for a friend ...”—MagnaofIllusion
In post 86, McMenno wrote:
is this campaign more intrigue-based? because I have a concept for an orc barbarian who is dumber than a rock and am not sure whether he would fit here
In post 73, chamber wrote:The demand for this seems really high so I've talked to SK and I'm going to throw my hat in as a DM. I'm looking to run a city centered campaign based on a 5e conversion (by me in real time as we run into it) of the pathfinder adventure path Curse of the Crimson Throne. The adventurers will start out being brought together to seek revenge against a local crime boss that has wronged them all in some way in the past. It will transition into a campaign where they will be offered options for quests at the local adventure's guild. Seeds for a greater narrative will be tied into some or most of the quests that the group choose to take. The setting will be high magic by 5e standards. Curse of the Crimson Throne originally is intended to run from first to 20th level. That could be quite a big time commitment so we might stop at another break point (perhaps as early as you getting revenge on the local crime boss.) dependent on how everyone is enjoying things.
is this campaign more intrigue-based? because I have a concept for an orc barbarian who is dumber than a rock and am not sure whether he would fit here
On one hand, I didn't intend for this to be all that intrigue heavy at all, it may play a part in places, but it wouldn't be a main theme. On the other, (and I've been guilty of this many times) I think going into a campaign with a character idea leads to worse experiences than collaborative character building and meta building to the themes of the campaign (which I guess is in part of why you are doing this).
A large part of things would be your own selection of quests, but it would be as a group so making sure the group is in alignment of purpose would be important.
@chamber, would we be held to alignment restrictions, etc. from Pathfinder? Specifically, if I make a paladin (because I really like 5e paladins) would there be an issue if he is not Lawful Good?
I've only made one good post, and don't you dare accuse me of doing it again.
In post 92, brassherald wrote:@chamber, would we be held to alignment restrictions, etc. from Pathfinder? Specifically, if I make a paladin (because I really like 5e paladins) would there be an issue if he is not Lawful Good?
We would be playing 5e. 5e alignment is more descriptive than prescriptive and doesn't explicitly limit any classes. I'm really serious about players goals being in alignment with each other though and not working against each other. This doesn't mean you have to be good. It does mean you all need to be evil or all need to be out for your selves as a group or etc.
In post 92, brassherald wrote:@chamber, would we be held to alignment restrictions, etc. from Pathfinder? Specifically, if I make a paladin (because I really like 5e paladins) would there be an issue if he is not Lawful Good?
We would be playing 5e. 5e alignment is more descriptive than prescriptive and doesn't explicitly limit any classes. I'm really serious about players goals being in alignment with each other though and not working against each other. This doesn't mean you have to be good. It does mean you all need to be evil or all need to be out for your selves as a group or etc.
Yeah, definitely still in, then, almost definitely as a paladin.
I've only made one good post, and don't you dare accuse me of doing it again.
The intent is for these to be play-by-post I believe? I've never run such a game but I was going to follow through with that. Seemed like it would reduce organizational complexities as well. I planned on creating a mish-mash thread for it once I knew there was sufficient interest.
Edit: will still likely create a topic here, but after doing some research, I think I might just create an external board for it. Handling organization in the thread here.
