Resistance

I agree. The tendency to powerplay was prevalent in pretty much all games past hegemony, although it doesn't help that a system rewards it as much as D&D does. Another issue is having the party split up permanently because it just leads to unequal wealth distribution and difficulty creating stories that impact people. Furthermore, it's like two separate sessions. I'm not fully objected to it, but I think it's a big contributor to sessions wearing out. You, Archi, Nex, Rowmin have said they are no preference. Mather, Retech are determined to stick with D&D. Mather criticised the system as soon as I mentioned a change, so he is just opposed to change. Retech is arguing a flawed cause. It's probably better to lose one or two players than continue with the recent abominations of sessions that have happened which weren't fun for anybody. I have exams for the next week, so we will resume on the 19th. Talk to me if you need help with character creation.

I got an error too. Recreated the poll.

I can't really comprehend the problem with Savage Worlds to be honest. The only criticism I have really had is Retech's: "You fail 10% of the time", however rolls are only made if something is meant to be a challenge. The best rider in the world does not fall off 10% of the time, he falls off 10% of the time when something is making him fall off. Likewise, you will raise 50% of the time meaning you will be able to do something amazing. Really though, this is a part of RPG's and if there is no need to roll then I am not adjusting challenges appropriately although this is probably due to imbalance (+20 perception on level 6s doesn't happen - so the rules don't work unless everybody optimises to a similar level) There's also righteous rage and bennies, which are like FATE points given at the start of every session. Mather: "Rules aren't easily accessible" Wrong. The quick start guide to the rules is 10 pages. the rules are simpler than D&D. Also there's an SRD: http://savagepedia.wikispaces.com I would have thought you would have preferred SW over D&D since it fixes all the things you didn't like: Vancian Casting replaced with rechargeable mana and rules hindering RP. - Alg, it's probably because I changed it to multiple choice and added 40k to the mix. Revote if you would like. Bear in mind what I have said in the last two posts please.

[remove this post, it made no sense]

I explained in an edit. The real issue is me, and my deciding that I cannot cope with the flaws of the pathfinder system. Regardless of whether you feel my issues are just projections of my own terrible DMing onto D&D or whether D&D is bad - I have said I cannot cope with it. This was originally rotating GM, and I have done about fifteen weeks since we stopped rotating (more like twelve, due to ceasing). Somebody else is free to take the post (please do not use the setting) if people want to continue using pathfinder - although I think it's probably doomed to face the same issues whatever happens. Windward was great, but it still had (worse) imbalance: Grim was a cleric (most powerful class in PF) with two CR 5 summons at level 7 to compliment his own cleric powers and Ross was powerplaying with a master summoner. Archi was a ninja, Earth was a weak rogue, I was a wizard built for team play,

Basically, but I would not want to run that for unrelated reasons. Tabletop games are played instead of videogames because: 1.) You can use inventive solutions to problems. 2.) Because there is actual dialogue (not dialogue trees) so you can roleplay effectively. 2a.) The world has a level of detail that cannot be found in videogames. 3.) People are too poor to afford a computer. Some good dungeon crawl games include: Dungeons of Dredmor, WoW, Minecraft Custom Maps/Hack&Slash mod, Stone Soup, Grimrock. In terms of dungeon crawling, these games are superior to anything I can do - therefore I have no real will to run a dungeon crawl and so would not. Honestly, without a story (or an attempt at one) there would be no point of ensuring people didn't optimise. Being super-duper overpowered demigods is counter-intuitive to any story and any sort of inventive solutions - nor do I want to run a story where all the enemies are demons/devils or something else that is significantly more powerful than the PCs - I want to run elves, humans, orcs and uzram (not dwarves, they are terrible) - having players who are never challenged by anything does not lead to an effective story. This is why I am suggesting a switch to a more balanced system - either by flat-out nerfing everybody (2e), giving players more cinematic powers such as extra wounds and better rolls (savage worlds) or controlling everything by fudging everything (dungeoneering).

Voting for pathfinder is in essence the same as voting for the campaign to be over since I am no longer willing to put the sustained effort into making sure people aren't powerplaying, especially with the attitude of some players that the objective is to sneak as much cheese past the GM as possible without him noticing. Examples: All of Retech's characters being unhittable save or die specialists, Mather's firebomber (which turned out not to work), Retech's money, Archi's custom wondrous item at 12% of actual price, Archi's ToB character, and many more. Two of those are just plain cheating. Furthermore, the system ends up with people specialising in something really niche (save or die spell or manoeuvre) and get it so that they can hit 100% of the time and deal a ridiculous amount of damage - in the end, to actually challenge PCs you have to create something that has an artificial immunity to their abilities, which feels tacked-on (why would a humanoid be constantly immune to mind-affecting spells, or have +20 untyped bonus to CMD?) which lowers their effectiveness and isn't fun at all. Although Mather and Retech have basically said that 'one-hitting goblins for two hours' is the sort of gameplay they want, which is to say that they want 0% chance of failure. Closing vote at 8

This is another potential system (http://www.gregstolze.com/reign/) it is perfect for this sort of game. I have not looked at it though so I'm not sure whether it's good or not. EDIT: The system itself is more confusing than D&D and doesn't really provide many benefits over SW. The rules for organisations are very good though, but it's certainly not something to bother with. SW: D4-12+? (highest is better) D&D: D20+? (highest is better) REIGN: STAT+POOL*D10 (match up results, work out wideness/height of dice roll. Kill self in process)

28285

I have to agree, apart from selected scenes the sexuality, especially in the brothels was just tacked on and not present in the book. It's not a problem though, the TV series does keep very close to the TV series and I think they do a good job of adapting it to a TV series. Joffrey is fantastic, Jack Gleeson does a fantastic job of portraying him. I was always rather disappointed about the lack of POV* and the fact there wasn't as much of him as I would have liked in the books, however even in the small parts where he is shown a lot of development of him as a character goes on. Also, I think that Cersei losing control over Joffrey was really well done. You don't really realise how terrible Cersei is until far far later, but I think everybody hated her as soon as she asked Robert to kill the Direwolves. Does a fantastic job. I never really liked Daenarys in the books, and I am beginning to like her even less in the TV series. Her gross entitlement isn't as blatant (at least early on), and you get a sense that she is doubting herself but throughout the TV series she is just painfully arrogant - they would do good to show a few scenes of her doubting herself. The person playing Jojen is terrible for the role and, in my opinion, not a very good actor at all. Furthermore, I find that the parts with Bran on the road have gotten painful to watch because of how Jojen and Meera are just swaggering around creating dissent - there was tension in the books but you sort of sympathise with both sides, I find it very hard to sympathise because of how badly Jojen (particularly) and Meera are acted. [spoiler=* spoiler] And him dying so soon Also, I think Tywin is a bit too blatant in the series. You don't really get any sense of realisation about him being so powerful. Also, he's nowhere near as ruthless. Also, you really get a sense Tywin hates Cersei in the books. This is not so prevalent but should be, I want to watch her suffer a bit more. I thought it's a pretty small detail, but when Robb beheads that guy who betrays him (something Karstark) he does it in one sweep like his father did earlier in the book. The fact that he failed to fully cut the head off is a metaphor for how terrible a leader he is, and how he can't be king of the North - this also happens with Theon Greyjoy although this is portrayed. I have no idea why the hell they cut this out, I thought it was rather important since it brings up a parallel between Theon and Robb. "My real father died" by Theon. What!? Theon would not have said something like that. Varys speaking to Olenna about Littlefinger: way to spell it out FFS, this was a ridiculous addition. The scene with Maergery and Sansa talking where she says "we will be very good friends" and she talks about marrying her brother. They're making all these interconnections really obvious when they don't really need to be.

Coriolanus 8/10 - Great film, rather heavy watching though. Dark City 6/10 - Enjoyable watch, but I felt a bit disappointed by the lack of closure Face/Off 6/10 - Surprisingly enjoyable, if you can just ignore the acting. Probably a bit of a controversial review, since most would say it was terrible.

Roll 1d6 for class 1. Commoner 2. Adept 3. Aristocrat 4. Expert 5. Warrior 6. You die of cholera and are out for one session. Re-roll. Roll 1d20, if you get above 10 your family has saved 5gp under the hay. Otherwise, you start with nothing but rags. Roll 1d3 for age. You do not get the aging bonuses, only the penalties since you have not devoted your life to study and adventure. Roll 2d6 for each stat. Apply them in order. Example: STR: 9 DEX: 5 CON: 8 WIS: 5 INT: 10 CHA: 4 Peasants did not get education. -1 in all mental ability scores. Roll 1d6 to see how many diseases you start with. These are terminal and can never be cured. If you start with six you die in the first session of dysentery. Roll 1d6 to see how many flaws you start with, then 1d12 for each (feeble, frail, inattentive, meagre fortitude, murky eyed, noncombatant, pathetic, shaky, slow, unreactive, vulnerable, weak will) http://tsuyoshikents...oners DR330.pdf (chicken-infested banned. Nice try. Instead you are constantly followed by a swarm of 1d10 chickens who bull rush you when you are weakened) You must make a DC 10 will save every week to avoid committing suicide due to the depressing life of a peasant. Roll 1d2 to see whether you are male or female. If you are female, you take a -4 strength penalty. If you are a female you have 1d6 children who you must look after or be executed. Roll 1d2 or above, you get pueperal fever and die. Roll 1d6 for languages 1. You cannot speak any languages. Because of your lack of knowledge about languages, bluff checks to imitate languages are made at a -10 penalty. 2. You can speak bad orc (-6 on charisma checks with orcs) 3. You can speak colloquial common (-6 on all charisma checks and can only speak to peasants in your village) 4. You can speak common with an accent (-2 on all charisma checks) 5. You can speak common 6. You can read and speak common Roll 1d10 to see what name you have: Male: 1 Merek 2 Carac 3 Ulric 4 Tybalt 5 Borin 6 Sadon 7 Terrowin 8 Rowan 9 Forthwind 10 Althalos Female: 1 Millicent 2 Alys 3 Ayleth 4 Thea 5 Alianor 6 Cedany 7 Ellyn 8 Gloriana 9 Arabella 10 Helewys Make a DC 15 intelligence check to pronounce the name properly. If you fail, you take -2 charisma with all nobles who know how to pronounce your name. I expect at least one A4 side of paper on backstory. This must be size 11, no margins.

All the core rules for Savage Worlds can be found in here: http://www.peginc.co...SWcore/TD06.pdf Other related: https://dl.dropboxus...y Companion.pdf (this is the same, but includes GM guidelines, NPCs and presets) https://dl.dropboxus...ition, 2011.pdf (This includes extra items) Your handle is Ctrl+F :P Although really it shouldn't be an issue since with D&D most people are forced to stat out their characters before creating the concept meaning that people often play rather similar weapons. If you want to be a knight with a halberd and dagger then decide that first and then look at the system. If you want to be somebody who conjures vermin and uses it to infest people, create the character then look at the system. There isn't much of a concept of optimisation, people choose to be weaker in one aspect and stronger than another instead of D&D where somebody can easily be stronger in all aspects. The system is more freeform, so treat as dungeoneering when creating characters and then stat out after. - 2e would not have anything like that. But it's still a possibility.

]I would include a plot to a point, I was considering the underdark (similar name :P) meaning drow, beholders, illithids, duegrar and other dark creatures. The quest would be a hunt for a macguffin by Lord Ansehelm (so it would be in the same universe), players would start at level 1. I would not ban optimisation, I would to a degree encourage it.[/size][/font] Players would start at level 1, but levelling would be very fast (double the standard levelling guidelines, so once per session) but when you die you start at the beginning of the dungeon at level 1 (although you will have cleared out everything. You would then reclaim your old items and continue the adventure. Monsters would be adjusted to the median party member. Also Dark Heresy is an option, but Psykers are rather overpowered.

Race, Class? Anal Circumference?

>Implying I'm not worse

No, but they are removing threads where people accuse Jagex of illegal activity. I wouldn't put it past the Tip.It moderation to do something like that - I'm sure they have plenty of skeletons in their closets. Jagex seems to have a history of preventing free speech, remember when the RSoF replaced rants with a few threads? No, makeup models needing to be female comes under bona fide occupational qualifications. Proof was given, if you actually look at the thread he has said that he has not seen a SINGLE coloured member in the videos. That's the catch - the discussion could be mature, the initial statement was rather.. childish. The lack of any actual facts on the ethnicity of jagex staff makes this no more then a wild guess, which hardly puts you in a position to make accusations of any sorts towards jagex on their hiring policy. Lashing out at an admin - even beyond the scope of the discussion of locking it or not - was a low blow, and was uncalled for. That said - Mercifull makes a really valid point on the census data. If jagex staff is to be mirrored by anything, it'd be UK population over a representation of it's player base. Also - it's an employers choice who they want to hire. If they insist on hiring 'local' people that are less skilled then a candidate from a different ethnicity - and thus being less cost-efficient tot the company - that's their own call to make. And not to forget, at my own job I've seen people apply with far higher qualifications then I did, but that didn't get hired due to my boss thinking they wouldn't 'fit' within the team. Just for reference - Had the post been asking if anyone had any data on the ethnicity of jagex staff members, rather then starting out for blaming them being 'white', that'd have been an entirely different approach to the discussion. There's plenty criticism towards jagex on this board (alot regarding ivp, mtx, sof, ..) so I fail to see your point there. "Jagex will be 100% white, because 85% of the population is white. We may have a token black member" This is an affirmative action debate, which would have been an intelligent discussion. Personally, I think that Jagex's intentional exclusion of 15% of the population requires some quotas however seemingly certain people don't care about the problem of racism.It's such a racist thing to say.

I mean something like three day stubble.

Another Nail in the Coffin

You cannot really notice the scars in the picture. I think you look better shaved. Or at least with stubble: http://uk.askmen.com/fashion/fashiontip_300/367_fashion_advice.html Personally I don't think your type of blonde or brown hair works very well with those sorts of beards. And your facial structure fits having stubble rather than a beard. Blonde hair works with large beards or stubble, but van [bleep] aren't ideal.

We shall continue in two weeks. This means the 19th of may. I think the game would really benefit if players inserted their own things into the world. The general scope of this would be a house or a quirk in the world. Try to stick with the current map, since editing will be painful and don't edit too much. Also: https://dl.dropboxus...y Companion.pdf This is for magic items and such. Edit; cards are a little cumbersome, so just roll 1d10!, exploding 12 = joker EDIT: First, you roll initiative (1d10, ace above 12 = joker, you can go wherever you want) You roll fighting/shooting against your opponents parry. If this raises, you add an additional 1d6 Then you roll damage (Strength+weapon damage) or just fixed with ranged weapons. The damage is compared to toughness. If it goes under, nothing happens. If it is the same with no raise (0-3 deviation) it causes the opponent to be shaken. Every raise over, however, adds an extra wound. Each wound a player suffers gives -1 on ALL checks & pace. Example: A low level mook has parry 2, and TN 5 (due to his leather armour), rolling 1d10 fighting you roll a 7. This is a raise, so you get an extra 1d6 to damage. You attack with a flail, (3) + raise damage (2) + Str damage (4) dealing a total of 9 damage. He takes one wound. The mook is killed/injured/removed from play. Example 2: A high level mook wielding a flail attacks the players. He has d8 str, parry 2, d10 fight and TN 6. He rolls first on initiative and attacks a player. He rolls 6 on fighting which just would beat a low-level player wearing full armour on the parry. He attacks, and deals 4+6, the flail aces so we roll again (4) so the total is 14 damage. Because of this the player takes two wounds, he can take 3 wounds before he dies. The PC decides to continue fighting, and so hits with his great axe (d10 strength, d12 fighting), he attacks: 8 which hits. Then he calculates damage, which is 6+7, 13 which means two wounds and therefore death for the high level kook. (I didn't properly roll for these, so these aren't representative of the wild die) - Now, unless you're fighting something like a giant octopus (where I would probably stat out each tentacle individually) you are all going to be ridiculously good at dispatching mooks. BBEG count as Wild Cards I believe. - System Analysis 2e - Probably impractical due to the multitude of rulebooks. Basically pathfinder, but with less opportunity for being broken. Lots of fun differences, like people not being able to roll Combat is just text-based. There is still the issue of optimisation. The power of the players in pathfinder is 5/10, this would be 2/10. Players will die, this may be a good thing or not. Savage Worlds - Has two primary sourcebooks, the fantasy and the core one. There are more, but this may be impractical. Combat would be on roll20 No issue of optimisation. Mortality rate is probably the same as pathfinder. The power of the players in pathfinder is 5/10, this would be 6-7/10 but with the risk of powerful aces dealing hefty damage. Pathfinder - Would be as is, but a constant dungeon crawl. Social encounters wouldn't really exist. Something like this: http://i.imgur.com/if3VdJh.png If you die, you start right back at the beginning. Dungeoneering - Similar to Savage Worlds, except no system. I would use something like Doodle God as a base for magic. Edit: Archi suggested word casting, it does seem like it would fix a lot of the problems. http://www.d20pfsrd..../words-of-power Other potential systems include WHFRP (not likely, due to its medium. As long as we start second career it would be fun, first career is a little heavy. If people want to continue with it as is, this may work relatively well. Personally, I think it's just an opportunity for abuse - no matter what I say, people will try to abuse the system to increase their power which will just result in less campaign time and more arguing but do discuss.

https://app.roll20.net/join/120684/oHs4Rg Possible session at 8:00 PM GMT depending on turnout. We can use presets, and then dedicate an hour to creating the higher level characters.

Oh, I was getting a bit upset there. Seems both you and iconic had the idea.

Are u trolling