|
Post by Betterout on Apr 10, 2005 14:24:27 GMT -5
I've been working on this campaign since my car wreck in 2003. I really spent a lot of time on building it up. I've devised entire language families for this one, folks. I have an 800+ word dictionary for one of them. Oh, and I drew a lot of useful maps, too.
For those of you to whom this may be meaningful, this would be another leg of the same big campaign I've been running with Misty, Jack, and Mandy.
Ideally, I'd like to play once every month or so, perhaps in the OKC Metro area.
|
|
|
Post by Tyler on Apr 10, 2005 14:30:04 GMT -5
Absolutely. I'm pretty sure the reason we haven't done it up till now is because of everyone's wacky time-restraints. So, we might consider setting it up like we set up our Axis and Allies games, somebody thows out a date and we all try and make it work. If you're wondering, there's no way I'm throwing out that date.
|
|
|
Post by Thanin on Apr 10, 2005 15:45:06 GMT -5
I'd be interested in this. Perhaps Rick and Katie would also want to do this.
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Apr 10, 2005 16:13:06 GMT -5
I wish that I could be there.
Jeff
|
|
|
Post by rickus on Apr 10, 2005 21:39:21 GMT -5
I'd be interested in this. Perhaps Rick and Katie would also want to do this. Damn Skippy! We're there dude!!!
|
|
|
Post by Thanin on Apr 11, 2005 0:49:26 GMT -5
Justin, is the world you've been making these past 3 years totally revolved around the 3.0/3.5 editions of D&D? If not then I'd like to make a formal request to have your game in the 2nd edition format. I think this format would work best with your disinterest in powerful characters. Also, it would help kill the aspects of the game that are too focused on the rules.
I've told Mike about your game and he's incredibly interested in the game, but he would also prefer this would be in any format but the 3/3.5 versions.
If Amanda felt she's too unfamiliar with the 1st and/or 2nd editions, and/or if Rick felt he'd forgotten to much about either of those to want to mess with them, then I'd of course go along with the 3.0/3.5 versions.
|
|
|
Post by Tyler on Apr 11, 2005 7:24:28 GMT -5
NO! What, are you kidding me? 2nd edition? Come on guys, lets not get crazy here. Just ban books outside the phb and disallow prestige classes. That takes care of the whole overpowered thing while still allowing for individuality within the game system. I think it is important to be able to individualize your character in the number system as well as in their personality. The problem has been that people do one and not the other, not the game system.
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Apr 11, 2005 10:32:26 GMT -5
It's nice that David invited me to play. Being a D&D junky, I'm interested in any game especially when role playing prevails over whatever non-role-players do when they're playing role-playing games. I don't feel entitled to weigh in on the system used since the DM is doing all the work and the players are all old friends. If you guys like 3.5, you should definitely use it. I can look for a Bunnies and Burrows pick-up game at the local grade school to get my fix of role playing.
|
|
|
Post by Betterout on Apr 11, 2005 10:50:07 GMT -5
Well, dang... I wish you guys would make up your minds; I finally put my first edition books in the 'less used' cabinet just a month or two ago! Just kidding, of course. But, no, this campaign was designed around 3.0 rules, as the existence of a sorcerer class is necessary for advancing what little plot there is (at the risk of giving too much up). If the format will be prohibitive to anyone, I can change all that, but it will put the game off track for another six months or so. That is, of course, unless someone wants to lend a hand to co-DM this monstrosity.......... any takers? Pweez, oh, pweez? Common weakness has always been a big interest of mine, as many of you know, and the same can be said of pure role-playing (at the expense of a bunch of dice rolling and rules lawyering). The theme of this campaign will likely be centered around the richness of the world to explore, and much of the exploration will be wilderness play not dungeoneering. So, don't expect many elaborate traps, deadly combat scenarios, or even clearly defined goals for the players. As I said yesterday when I was joking with Dave about it, the toughest villain you're likely to face is a guy with a mean backstory. I want to say this upfront because I know that sort of campaign is off-putting for many players. If it's gonna be too boring for you, I'd rather not waste your time. But thanks for all the interest so far! -jtm
|
|
|
Post by Betterout on Apr 11, 2005 10:55:30 GMT -5
Oh yeah, if we did convert it to another D&D format, my initial feeling is that it should be Basic/Expert. So bust out your red books, guys, and welcome back to a time when two-word alignments were one word too many... and elf was a class.
|
|
|
Post by Thanin on Apr 11, 2005 11:17:53 GMT -5
I actually find the idea of a basic/expert based game wildly fascinating! Unfortunately I've lost those box sets long ago. Do you still have any of them? I would honestly be interested in working on a conversion to one of those formats if you had any lying around. Of course I'd want to get a look at them first before I'd totally commit to such a thing. They might be so lame that I'd have to not want to do that.
But probably we'll end up having to go with 3.0 since you've already done all your work based in that system. But I really think that 3.0 will be just a distraction if the game is based in so little combat/tactics.
|
|
|
Post by Tyler on Apr 11, 2005 11:23:41 GMT -5
What restrictions do you have on character creation? Social conventions? Alignment? Class? Level? What's everyone want to play?
|
|
|
Post by Jeff on Apr 11, 2005 11:32:14 GMT -5
Guys,
I don't want to hijack this thread by any means, but has your general opinion of 3.0/3.5 soured? And if so, were the reasons pretty much the ones we had in 2000, or have they changed at all?
BTW: I bought Maddie the New Basic Set. It was interesting for an evening's entertainment. She got to be DM! But the rules are very incomplete, and can't even take you to 3rd level, as is promised on the box. Basically, it's a $25 pulg for the regular game. On the good side, it does have 16 plastic miniatures, including a black dragon. [Emily especially likes that one.]
Jeff
PS You should really ask Adam if he wants to play, too.
|
|
|
Post by Amanda McBride on Apr 11, 2005 11:41:14 GMT -5
Speaking of Adam... where is he hiding out these days?
|
|
|
Post by amanda on Apr 11, 2005 11:50:45 GMT -5
Oh, and though I figured my interest in the campaign was a given, I'll go ahead and actually say so in Justin's thread. Count me in. It will be oh so nice to game with you's guys again!
|
|
|
Post by Thanin on Apr 11, 2005 11:53:47 GMT -5
Justin, I've decided to go ahead and help take on the task of converting the game to 2.0 so we can have that done as quickly as possible. Check your inbox under Betterout. I've sent you some ideas I've had for those NPCs we talked about last night on the phone. Actually I just reread what Jeff said and I thought he'd been talking about how the original basic/expert didn't advance you beyond 3rd level. If we have the original sets, I say we go for those! I'll check Ebay now and see if I can get one if we don't have access to them.
Jeff, 3.0/3.5 has some great innovations. It streamlines some areas of the game that've needed that for years. I mean THACO? Come on, that's just lame. And it gives the player a great amount of freedom for structuring a character... but that's where the fun stops, literally. You were 100% right when you said a computer could DM the technical side of 3.0/3.5 better than a human. And it turns combat into a boardgame. In fact, this whole discussion has reinforced my need to Not have the combats in the grids. I still want to use the grid map because it makes it easier for me to tell what figures are what. But at this point I'll feel that I'll never have the figures in the squares for combat.
Oh and yes will be great to RP with you again Amanda... and you too Rick and hopefully Katie!
|
|
|
Post by Betterout on Apr 11, 2005 14:08:55 GMT -5
Yes, I have a bunch of those old box sets laying around. In fact, last year Joe Hall cleaned out one of his bookshelves and gave me all of his old rpg stuff: Basic, Expert, original PHB (in great condition, I might add), Top Secret, and his Rifts stuff. In fact, if memory serves, I have multiple copies of Basic. That would be nice, since there was only one book, which the DM and players would have to share.
Incidentally, I still have all those old Traveller adventures stewing around in my noggin, and Jeff gave me his old Star Frontiers box, too...
|
|
|
Post by Thanin on Apr 11, 2005 14:23:34 GMT -5
Ok, I think I say this about once a decade, but I really would like to finally play that crazy old Traveller game you had a multitude of ideas going. But I also know that your D&D game has much work put into it too (and I'm always interested in D&D). Basically what I'm saying is that, I'd gladly play either Traveller or D&D. So either way is good for me, but in all seriousness, I think that it would be super cool if we actually busted out the Basic. How whacky would that be?
And again, I'd hate to kill your 3 years of work into your D&D game in the 3.0 system just because we have the potential to play Basic. About the transfer to 2.0, I was just trying to mess with Tyler, but this Basic idea really does interest me.
|
|
|
Post by Tyler on Apr 11, 2005 16:46:47 GMT -5
Much of the abilities of the mage are useless unless there's an accurate picture of what the battlefield looks like. If not, then when it comes to their turn the back-n-forth sounds like this: Player: I want to cast a fireball, how many of this group can I get? DM: Um, lets say around 3. Player: Well, that's not enough. What if I use whirling blade along this line here to get these four. DM: Actually, they're not clustered like that exactly, so you could only get two of them. Player: OK, I'll use Melf's Acid Arrow on this guy, he looks like the leader. DM: Actually, you're really far away from that guy.
The only reason to be against the tactics is if you don't know the tactics. If you know the tactics the discussion goes like this:
Player: I cast fireball on these 5 guys and move from here to here. Base damage is 14.
DM: ok.
There is no way that playing strictly by the rules would make our game slow down slower than it already is. The reason 3rd edition games drag is because people either don't know the rules, aren't familiar with their character, haven't read their spells before it's time to cast them, or don't know their options. This changes after a couple of game sessions.
|
|
|
Post by Thanin on Apr 11, 2005 17:34:47 GMT -5
Regardless of all this, I HATE the way 3.0s turn it into a board game. This goes against the very spirit of the imagination required. I notice in most of our fights, everyone but one person understands whats going on and knows whats happening at any given moment. Most of us are able to use our imagination to see whats happening, and the detail-light method I've been using in my game has been adequate for everyone but maybe one of us.
But none of this matters. Justin is the DM and if he's spent 3 years on the game in 3.0 then lets go for it. I'm not going to be the person responsible for wrecking all that work! Though I will say that every character I create will have the sole purpose of going against every plan and every tactic Tyler's character comes up with and will kill him the instant he sees Tylers character. And if my character dies, then every character I ever create afterwards will have the exact same plan.
Just kidding...?
|
|