Edit: despite that I would like to enforce that characters are kept the same from now on - normally changing around skills and feats aren't allowed so when I get around to it I will update the OP with the character sheets.

I was actually tempted to switch characters entirely, to either a paladin, cavalier/fighter, or rogue depending on the needs of the party.

Leadership is banned, right?

No

 

The issue with settlements was unrealistic populations, not having a group of low-level followers and mid-level cohort.

 

Edit: leadership allowed except without cohorts. A reminder that you can't build your own followers.

You think that's the primary concern with Leadership?

 

How does a combat work with twice the characters?

Archi says:

 

Hi all, please consult:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/12603519/Party.txt

 

Will be on hand in the chatroom for any questions and such.

Also can someone tell Resistance.

Archi says:

 

Hi all, please consult:

https://dl.dropbox.c...03519/Party.txt

 

Will be on hand in the chatroom for any questions and such.

Also can someone tell Resistance.

 

:thumbup:

 

In-session rolling please.

What's our starting level if we're regenning? 6 or 7?

7

Oh [bleep] no.

The Free-Coin district is a little extreme, looking at it again. A fairly easy chance to get 75k and if lucky a chance to get 470k, maybe a little unbalancing if anybody gets it.

Ok, so since Res thought it unfair to let me be a living nuke, if I die as Serén my next character is going to be a Very Young Bronze Dragon

Taking two archetypes for the same class is allowed if they don't conflict, isn't it?

Yeah.

How incredibly foreboding that is.

I can now GM regularly; we could remove the rotation in favour of a single GM which would fix the issues with having more than one game-master.

You're just miffed at the TK.

Can you speak in English?

You're just mad because of the team-kill.

I'm more miffed about disregard for the system and rolls where rolls were fudged or ignored multiple times. I don't intend to continue playing, for the next month, what is essentially the Nth dungeoneering, thinly-veiled as pathfinder.

Don't even compare it to Dungeoneering, Dungeoneering is vastly better because there at least you aren't limited to classes and magic isn't limited to spells.

I'm more miffed about disregard for the system and rolls where rolls were fudged or ignored multiple times. I don't intend to continue playing, for the next month, what is essentially the Nth dungeoneering, thinly-veiled as pathfinder.

Oh, get over it. D'neering is a dead horse. Yes, roleplaying was involved, big surprise. Yes, elements there of were similar, maybe because it's the exact same people. Though I would add that we're a thoroughly unimaginative group; Alg always plays a roguish female, Retech ALWAYS plays Jen, and Mather always plays a physically perfect 'paragon except when they aren't' who tries to do stupid shit that abuses the game mechanics or lack thereof.

 

I will say my time playing last session was thoroughly lackluster, though, but Archi said it went well earlier on.

I'm more miffed about disregard for the system and rolls where rolls were fudged or ignored multiple times. I don't intend to continue playing, for the next month, what is essentially the Nth dungeoneering, thinly-veiled as pathfinder.

Oh, get over it. D'neering is a dead horse. Yes, roleplaying was involved, big surprise. Yes, elements there of were similar, maybe because it's the exact same people. Though I would add that we're a thoroughly unimaginative group; Alg always plays a roguish female, Retech ALWAYS plays Jen, and Mather always plays a physically perfect 'paragon except when they aren't' who tries to do stupid shit that abuses the game mechanics or lack thereof.

 

I will say my time playing last session was thoroughly lackluster, though, but Archi said it went well earlier on.

In general I don't think it's possible to avoid standard fantasy tropes - undead, goblins, slimes and dragons are all stock monsters that will appear in pretty much every single campaign. Elements will aways be similar but it's nice to have different iterations on it, like the kobolds in Windward. That being said, I don't really care about what elements are used or what they are similar to - I only have an objection to disregard of the system. Roleplaying wasn't involved at all, there was less conversation and roleplay than even my inherently low-RP sessions, at least until I quit.

To be fair to the group, I think we have done a good job of playing fairly different characters: Retech is playing a cat named Jen, but not Jen; Alg is playing a Dhampir male inquisitor; albeit Mather is exactly as described.

 

I am fairly confident that all rolls made were fudged and I pointed this out three or four times before I left. I'm using dungeoneering to refer to a systemless game, which this degenerates into if the DM is just fudging every single roll. I don't have an objection to fudging rolls in moderation for the sake of fun and story but if the GM is just going to decide how things react without any sort of idea about what's going to happen next then this is not pathfinder, it's dungeoneering.

I think I speak for everybody here; except Mather of course, and I'm not going to explain why dungeoneering is not in fact better since I am confident that I've already responded to this and it just comes down to preference anyway - although

- except with preference for pathfinder, I don't really think Mather understands the system enough to make all concepts work like in dungeoneering, besides - even in dungeoneering you would be stronger if you specialised except in pathfinder it's both more realistic and balanced as it's under the assumption that a class is a discipline you devote your life to, and somebody who devotes their life to wizardry will be a good wizard, likewise somebody who devotes their life to brawling will be a good fighter and somebody who tries to master everything in most cases will fail however some people are able to have it all - this is called optimisation; when I say that I'm sick of dungeoneering spin-offs.

I just gave up, because the pathfinder/DnD series is not my favourite game. Actually I dislike it intensely, as trying to read the effing manual as Nex would say is both a complicated endeavor and ussually isn't the same bloody manual you all appear to be using. It never is. And trying to run through a game you half know the rules of and keep having to stop and ask doesn't seem like fun to me because I'm merely holding you dudes back. And.. It's just not fun either.

Alg always plays a roguish female

Guilty as charged. I'd be better about it if any of us actually roleplayed - they would still mostly be rogueish females, but with unique and varied backstories :razz:

 

Next up: ultra-manly polearm-wielding paladin. Or maybe a witch with a prehensile mustache. I hear that's a possibility...

I understand the system, I just loathe being subject to it. And this is what makes Dungeoneering better, whereas DnD games are math and rules, Dungeoneering is freedom.

In DnDs you need to be a ranger to set a trap, in Dungeoneering you can just enchant a homemade crystal with magical energy and plant it as a landmine or set up a boulder to drop when triggered by a tripwire.

In DnDs you need a certain amount of levels to cast certain spells to do certain things, in Dungeoneering you can even nuke the shit out of a forest with a combination of effort, thinking and understanding on how things interact with different forms of magical energy.

In DnDs you've only got certain weapons and armor that can only be used certain ways, in Dungeoneering you can craft armor out of quartz to become Iron Man, create a gun that uses magic to fire rocks or make electrical grenades.

 

And Nex, I don't play a physical paragon, I just play in a style that combines weird strategy with brute force. Apart from in the second Dungeoneering where I actually trained strength as a skill, the reason why I come off as stronger and more resilient is because whereas everyone else keeps a certain distance, I see no problem with going into grapple against an enemy five times my size.

In DnDs you need to be a ranger to set a trap, in Dungeoneering you can just enchant a homemade crystal with magical energy and plant it as a landmine or set up a boulder to drop when triggered by a tripwire.

Rangers don't even get a bonus to traps. Basic traps can be constructed for free by any class using a craft check, there are a load of options for magical traps (symbol, rune, contingency, alarm, animated objects, etc). You can pay money for advanced traps by creating them yourself by using the table.

 

In DnDs you need a certain amount of levels to cast certain spells to do certain things, in Dungeoneering you can even nuke the shit out of a forest with a combination of effort, thinking and understanding on how things interact with different forms of magical energy.

Good.

 

Although different things do react differently to different types of energy, correct but pathfinder is intended to be balanced. It may be fun to hear 'the forest blows up' but the intention is that people find fun in working towards a common goal rather than simply doing elaborate shows of power.

 

In DnDs you've only got certain weapons and armor that can only be used certain ways, in Dungeoneering you can craft armor out of quartz to become Iron Man, create a gun that uses magic to fire rocks or make electrical grenades.

Crystalline armour

Synthesist

Golem Armour

 

Launching Crossbow

Alchemist

 

-

 

Basically, the only way you're limited by using pathfinder is not being able to play a demigod who after a few sessions can raze mountains as well as be a combat machine. There is nothing you could get or do in dungeoneering that you can't do in pathfinder.

It seems to me like your issue is with mid-level play rather than pathfinder itself.