OOC Thread

[mithrandir138]

For OOC general discussion.

[Mondego]

Any racial limitations? You mentioned that one of the PCs was a half-orc. Can all of the different races group together?

Guidelines for starting HP?

Alignments I am guessing are all non evil? I am asking because I was thinking of playing a Paladin.

[mithrandir138]

Any racial limitations? You mentioned that one of the PCs was a half-orc. Can all of the different races group together?

No racial limitations

Guidelines for starting HP?

Added this to the character generation thread -- you get max for your class.

Alignments I am guessing are all non evil? I am asking because I was thinking of playing a Paladin.

Added this too, it came up in conversation in the original "interest check" thread. No evil, Chaotic Neutral is as close to evil as you can go.

[mithrandir138]

Checking in -- anyone need any assistance? If you need help, I am just a PM away. This message isn't meant to add pressure, just making sure you guys are doing OK.

[Blazeguard]

Just trying to flesh out my character bio and history. That's the hard part, at least for me.

[jdluna]

It will probably be the weekend before I get my character fleshed out.

How do you get the character sheets like everyone has in the character thread?

[mithrandir138]

Just trying to flesh out my character bio and history. That's the hard part, at least for me.

No problem, no pressure. Let me know where I can help. Give me some ideas of your final race/class (if it's not what's on your sheet) and I will give you the setting information that's relavent.

[mithrandir138]

It will probably be the weekend before I get my character fleshed out.

No problem, take your time. give me an idea of what you are thinking via PM and I can help with setting-specific information for background.

How do you get the character sheets like everyone has in the character thread?

We are using the "Dice Roller" -- here's the guide:
http://www.unseenservant.com/Default.asp?do=guide

[Vargr1105]

I am at complete loss on character background generation. I think its because I chose to play an Assassin in a setting that reminds me, more than anything else, of Middle Earth during the 2nd Age.

With the GM's permission I would like to take the "struck with amnesia" route. It would be a first for me and he can devise whatever fiendish shenanigans he wishes about the PC's past.

[mithrandir138]

Just FYI -- I haven't heard from jdluna since Saturday Nov, 24 -- I PM'ed him on Saturday Dec, 1 and he hasn't logged in to receive the message. I am marking him "MIA" and I will give him until tomorrow night to respond. I will reach out to Saul Panzer (the only person on the waiting list) after that and see if he is still interested.

[mithrandir138]

What do you guys think about using individual initiative for the players and friendly NPCs and group initiative for each type of creature/foe, etc.? I am thinking this might work best, but I am unsure of if or how this will break the game. Thoughts?

[NJWilliam]

Are we rolling initiative each round or just once at the beginning of combat?
If each round AND individual, that can be a lot to track.
I personally like the change of initiative each round.

[Blazeguard]

Unless we're fighting an army, I would say roll individual initiative for players and NPC's. It's pbp so you don't have the time crunch that you would in a face-to-face game and I also like the changing initiative each round.

[mithrandir138]

Are we rolling initiative each round or just once at the beginning of combat?
If each round AND individual, that can be a lot to track.
I personally like the change of initiative each round.

Since we are doing AD&D 2nd Ed. style initiative, it will be re-roll every round. So it's "State action/intent" <roll> <resolve> "State action/intent" <roll> <resolve> -- lather rinse repeat.

[moorcrys]

What do you guys think about using individual initiative for the players and friendly NPCs and group initiative for each type of creature/foe, etc.? I am thinking this might work best, but I am unsure of if or how this will break the game. Thoughts?

I think it's fine... I have been in games where that's how it's done and it worked out ok. You could do a seperate init for leaders and mooks - like the goblin chieftain will go seperately from his bodyguards, but that's totally up to what's best for keeping you sane with all of the init numbers.

[NJWilliam]

I think it's up to you with how many numbers you want to deal with every round.
I don't think individual initiative adds a whole lot to new initiative each round, and I'm personally fine with rulings on who goes first among party members based on what they're doing.

[mithrandir138]

I don't think individual initiative adds a whole lot to new initiative each round, and I'm personally fine with rulings on who goes first among party members based on what they're doing.

A new individual initiative each round is pretty important when you are using 2e style combat sequence. Each person states what they will do, then it's resolved in initiative order. If the thing you were going to bash is dead (or something else happens) your action doesn't happen that round.

We'll see how it works out. If it becomes a pain or just doesn't work, I will adjust as needed if everyone is tolerant of a little change

[Vargr1105]

AD&D-wise I have only recently become familiar with the 1st Ed version and am quite happy with it. I don't know how the 2nd Ed one pans out (and there are several versions of it) so I will let more experienced opinions prevail. If it doesn't quite work on PbP we can always make changes.

[mithrandir138]

If it doesn't quite work on PbP we can always make changes.

My thoughts exactly.

Just some contrast, and discussion because I am kindof a rules nerd:
The standard way that AD&D 1st Edition determined initiative was with d6 rolls for each side, not each player (the manual actually states that they should be of different color/size, which eludes to them both being rolled at once). The higher roll won initiative.

2nd Edition had several "optional" ways to determine initiative. The "most realistic" way was for each PC/NPC/Creature to roll individually with a d10, and the lowest wins.

The big thing that makes those so different in my mind (and something I have seen ran in all sorts of ways, and ignored) is the statement of your intent to do something before the initiative is rolled. There is a larger chance that something odd is going to happen and make your move "impossible/invalid/etc." before you get to your turn in individual initiative.

To me, it's more realistic for Joe the Ranger to say: "I am going to fire an arrow at goblin 1," and Jim the Mage to say "I am going to blast an area of effect vaporizing spell on the group of goblins." If the Mage wins initiative and blows up goblin 1 with his goblin buddies and almost simultaneously, but afterwards, Joe shoots an arrow at where goblin 1 used to be, doing nothing constructive and possibly losing the arrow to wastage.

No one "takes turns" in a real battle. To me initiative is more about resolving what happens in what order. That's what kills me, generally, about modern games. It's roll initiative once per encounter, round robin and do X until your eyes bleed, with rarely any dynamic things happening to change the order of combat. Pass the cheetos, I am bored and waiting for my turn, because I figured out what I am going to do when it comes time, and that may be a while.

[jdluna]

sorry guys,I had a family crisis over the weekend and am now just getting back around. I'm still in.