Skype sounds like a great tool to streamline encounters, otherwise you'll find online games to be a helluva lot more sluggish than the real thing
When I started out playing D&D online using Maptools, the group I played with was pretty shy about roleplaying. We ended up using voicechat for combat related things and the maptools chatbox for roleplaying endeavours. It worked pretty well in our experience.
i think i'm going to start running a d&d campaign for my friends back in ontario using masterplan, skype, and maybe google docs
i sent out a message, i'm hoping that people will be interested (people will probably be interested)
has anyone run online games before? what sort of problems should I expect/work against/design adventures to accomodate?
the scarlets and I played a Mage game online for a few months.
Mage doesn't require minatures, so we didn't need any software that needed to keep track of that stuff. Plus mage is a d10 only system.
We actually determines Teamspeak to be the best software for us.
Teamspeak allows for voice chat, voice prioritization(so the DM always gets his word through), PMs, and a d10 dice rolling plugin that I modified to work inside PMs as well. That way the DM can see all the rolls and speak to specific players.
It actually worked out pretty damn well, all things considered.
The hardest part was keeping track of documents. Character sheets, maps(if you have them), etc.
NogsCrap, crap, mega crap.Crap, crap, mega crap.Registered Userregular
edited May 2011
I am gonna start playing Pathfinder here in about a month or so.
Currently looking at making an Inquisitor.
Anyone here play Pathfinder before? I hear it is like D&D 3.75
I've never played 3.5, what kind of bias does this system have?
Like 4e is very very combat bias, so much so they had to come out with another DM book that focused on non-combat challenges, because it wasn't really tied into the game.
whereas World of Darkness stuff like Vampires and Mage are way less combat oriented and more RP/skill based.
I've never played 3.5, what kind of bias does this system have?
Bias in what respect? Do you mean where does it shine and fail?
I think he means combat vs. roleplay/social.
3.5, like ANY D&D product, is very much a combat game. Some would argue that there's more support in 3.5 and Pathfinder for out-of-combat stuff, and they may very well be right, but don't expect anything on the level of WoD.
I've never played 3.5, what kind of bias does this system have?
Bias in what respect? Do you mean where does it shine and fail?
I think he means combat vs. roleplay/social.
3.5, like ANY D&D product, is very much a combat game. Some would argue that there's more support in 3.5 and Pathfinder for out-of-combat stuff, and they may very well be right, but don't expect anything on the level of WoD.
Stilts in correct in that D&D 3.5 is designed for combat. The system is also ingrained in the mentality of adventurers kicking down a dungeon door and killing things for money. Now with that said the system does off some flexibility in which you can do complete social encounters (nothing akin to WoD or CoC) or stretch the system to incorporate different models of play.
In the end 3.5 is pretty flexible in the lower levels but picks up too much steam in the higher levels where every problem/situation will be handled by a caster.
Zonugal on
0
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
I've never played 3.5, what kind of bias does this system have?
Bias in what respect? Do you mean where does it shine and fail?
I think he means combat vs. roleplay/social.
3.5, like ANY D&D product, is very much a combat game. Some would argue that there's more support in 3.5 and Pathfinder for out-of-combat stuff, and they may very well be right, but don't expect anything on the level of WoD.
Stilts in correct in that D&D 3.5 is designed for combat. The system is also ingrained in the mentality of adventurers kicking down a dungeon door and killing things for money. Now with that said the system does off some flexibility in which you can do complete social encounters (nothing akin to WoD or CoC) or stretch the system to incorporate different models of play.
In the end 3.5 is pretty flexible in the lower levels but picks up too much steam in the higher levels where every problem/situation will be handled by a caster.
or the reaping mauler who will grapple a t-rex and win
I've never played 3.5, what kind of bias does this system have?
Bias in what respect? Do you mean where does it shine and fail?
I think he means combat vs. roleplay/social.
3.5, like ANY D&D product, is very much a combat game. Some would argue that there's more support in 3.5 and Pathfinder for out-of-combat stuff, and they may very well be right, but don't expect anything on the level of WoD.
Stilts in correct in that D&D 3.5 is designed for combat. The system is also ingrained in the mentality of adventurers kicking down a dungeon door and killing things for money. Now with that said the system does off some flexibility in which you can do complete social encounters (nothing akin to WoD or CoC) or stretch the system to incorporate different models of play.
In the end 3.5 is pretty flexible in the lower levels but picks up too much steam in the higher levels where every problem/situation will be handled by a caster.
or the reaping mauler who will grapple a t-rex and win
Reminds me of my friend's Pathfinder monk, who grappled a dragon so my Crusader could coup-de-grace him.
Stilts on
0
Options
Zonugal(He/Him) The Holiday ArmadilloI'm Santa's representative for all the southern states. And Mexico!Registered Userregular
I've never played 3.5, what kind of bias does this system have?
Bias in what respect? Do you mean where does it shine and fail?
I think he means combat vs. roleplay/social.
3.5, like ANY D&D product, is very much a combat game. Some would argue that there's more support in 3.5 and Pathfinder for out-of-combat stuff, and they may very well be right, but don't expect anything on the level of WoD.
Stilts in correct in that D&D 3.5 is designed for combat. The system is also ingrained in the mentality of adventurers kicking down a dungeon door and killing things for money. Now with that said the system does off some flexibility in which you can do complete social encounters (nothing akin to WoD or CoC) or stretch the system to incorporate different models of play.
In the end 3.5 is pretty flexible in the lower levels but picks up too much steam in the higher levels where every problem/situation will be handled by a caster.
or the reaping mauler who will grapple a t-rex and win
Umm... Reaping Maulers are some of the worst grapplers in 3.5
Zonugal on
0
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
I've never played 3.5, what kind of bias does this system have?
Bias in what respect? Do you mean where does it shine and fail?
I think he means combat vs. roleplay/social.
3.5, like ANY D&D product, is very much a combat game. Some would argue that there's more support in 3.5 and Pathfinder for out-of-combat stuff, and they may very well be right, but don't expect anything on the level of WoD.
Stilts in correct in that D&D 3.5 is designed for combat. The system is also ingrained in the mentality of adventurers kicking down a dungeon door and killing things for money. Now with that said the system does off some flexibility in which you can do complete social encounters (nothing akin to WoD or CoC) or stretch the system to incorporate different models of play.
In the end 3.5 is pretty flexible in the lower levels but picks up too much steam in the higher levels where every problem/situation will be handled by a caster.
or the reaping mauler who will grapple a t-rex and win
Umm... Reaping Mauler's are some of the worst grapplers in 3.5
wait, weren't they the grappling based prestige class?
PiptheFair on
0
Options
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
edited May 2011
what kinda punk-ass cavalier needs help killing things?
I've never played 3.5, what kind of bias does this system have?
Bias in what respect? Do you mean where does it shine and fail?
I think he means combat vs. roleplay/social.
3.5, like ANY D&D product, is very much a combat game. Some would argue that there's more support in 3.5 and Pathfinder for out-of-combat stuff, and they may very well be right, but don't expect anything on the level of WoD.
Stilts in correct in that D&D 3.5 is designed for combat. The system is also ingrained in the mentality of adventurers kicking down a dungeon door and killing things for money. Now with that said the system does off some flexibility in which you can do complete social encounters (nothing akin to WoD or CoC) or stretch the system to incorporate different models of play.
In the end 3.5 is pretty flexible in the lower levels but picks up too much steam in the higher levels where every problem/situation will be handled by a caster.
or the reaping mauler who will grapple a t-rex and win
Umm... Reaping Mauler's are some of the worst grapplers in 3.5
wait, weren't they the grappling based prestige class?
They are but that doesn't mean they are good at it (and they aren't).
The real grappling-based prestige class is Black Blood Cultist (Champions of Ruin).
Zonugal on
0
Options
NogsCrap, crap, mega crap.Crap, crap, mega crap.Registered Userregular
I've never played 3.5, what kind of bias does this system have?
Bias in what respect? Do you mean where does it shine and fail?
I think he means combat vs. roleplay/social.
3.5, like ANY D&D product, is very much a combat game. Some would argue that there's more support in 3.5 and Pathfinder for out-of-combat stuff, and they may very well be right, but don't expect anything on the level of WoD.
Stilts in correct in that D&D 3.5 is designed for combat. The system is also ingrained in the mentality of adventurers kicking down a dungeon door and killing things for money. Now with that said the system does off some flexibility in which you can do complete social encounters (nothing akin to WoD or CoC) or stretch the system to incorporate different models of play.
In the end 3.5 is pretty flexible in the lower levels but picks up too much steam in the higher levels where every problem/situation will be handled by a caster.
or the reaping mauler who will grapple a t-rex and win
Reminds me of my friend's Pathfinder monk, who grappled a dragon so my Crusader could coup-de-grace him.
so far, every single D&D character i've made has ridden a dragon successfully for at least 1 round.
Who here played Call of Cthulhu? Because it's awesome.
i've run it a couple of times, but i haven't quite figured out how to pace it effectively. how'd yours go?
Pacing depends a lot on the group and the time you have. I like to play it slow and let my players have fun with their role. The horror hits harder when you can immerse them in the mundane. But I'm also gifted with players who bring a typewriter to do their notes on and obses over minor details. Stuff like that does wonders for the atmosphere.
If your group likes fast horror then design the adventure accordingly. Not all Call of Cthulhu adventure have to be library based.
Try to do one in real time. A quick example: Your players are a group of illegal immigrants trying to cross the border in the back of a van. Suddenly there car crashes and they are trapped inside of it. Then the old mexican lady next to them begins to behave weirdly and something not quite human is trying to get in.
The whole thing starts with a car crash and it doesn't get much better, so there shouldn't be any really boring moments. But the best thing here is that you have them in a small place and you can control the pace from the very beginning. Give them enough options like a shotgun in the van, an old mobile radio stuff like that. And if that isn't enough let them mistrust each other.
MacGuffin on
0
Options
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
PiptheFairFrequently not in boats.Registered Userregular
edited May 2011
man, gygax was such an asshole dm
PiptheFair on
0
Options
Der Waffle MousBlame this on the misfortune of your birth.New Yark, New Yark.Registered Userregular
edited May 2011
To be fair, Tomb of Horrors was pretty much meant to be a convention meat-grinder where the point wasn't so much to finish it, just to see how long the party lasted, and then compare your nerd bragging rights to other nerds who died in the tomb.
StraightziHere we may reign secure, and in my choice,To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered Userregular
edited May 2011
I long to some day have a group serious enough to play Cthulhu with me. I know part of my failures in the past with it have been from me writing shitty plots, but I've always played with fairly casual gamers, alongside, often, a very serious DM, either myself or another person. It results in a really fun game atmosphere, but I'd never want to put Call of Cthulhu on most of the people I play with. The closest I get these days is like, Arkham Horror, and that just ends up being a pulp game nine times out of ten.
Posts
Yes, yes that is something I would like to do.
When I started out playing D&D online using Maptools, the group I played with was pretty shy about roleplaying. We ended up using voicechat for combat related things and the maptools chatbox for roleplaying endeavours. It worked pretty well in our experience.
The book is several hundred pages, mostly reference charts.
You often have to reference several charts for a single act.
There is very little room to do anything that doesn't have charts already assigned to it.
There are charts for rape, and they cross- reference the penis size of the attacker relative to the size of the victims vagina or anus.
the scarlets and I played a Mage game online for a few months.
Mage doesn't require minatures, so we didn't need any software that needed to keep track of that stuff. Plus mage is a d10 only system.
We actually determines Teamspeak to be the best software for us.
Teamspeak allows for voice chat, voice prioritization(so the DM always gets his word through), PMs, and a d10 dice rolling plugin that I modified to work inside PMs as well. That way the DM can see all the rolls and speak to specific players.
It actually worked out pretty damn well, all things considered.
The hardest part was keeping track of documents. Character sheets, maps(if you have them), etc.
PARKER, YOU'RE FIRED! <-- My comic book podcast! Satan look here!
Currently looking at making an Inquisitor.
Anyone here play Pathfinder before? I hear it is like D&D 3.75
I've never played 3.5, what kind of bias does this system have?
Like 4e is very very combat bias, so much so they had to come out with another DM book that focused on non-combat challenges, because it wasn't really tied into the game.
whereas World of Darkness stuff like Vampires and Mage are way less combat oriented and more RP/skill based.
PARKER, YOU'RE FIRED! <-- My comic book podcast! Satan look here!
And then everyone in the group will suddenly not be able to make it due to other plans and the campaign will fall apart after 3 short sessions.
*sob*
Nah cause none of the players will have to study for a biology exam that coming Monday.
Heh.
Hehe...
Hahahaha...
AAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
College has prepared you for nothing.
Bias in what respect? Do you mean where does it shine and fail?
I think he means combat vs. roleplay/social.
3.5, like ANY D&D product, is very much a combat game. Some would argue that there's more support in 3.5 and Pathfinder for out-of-combat stuff, and they may very well be right, but don't expect anything on the level of WoD.
i've run it a couple of times, but i haven't quite figured out how to pace it effectively. how'd yours go?
Stilts in correct in that D&D 3.5 is designed for combat. The system is also ingrained in the mentality of adventurers kicking down a dungeon door and killing things for money. Now with that said the system does off some flexibility in which you can do complete social encounters (nothing akin to WoD or CoC) or stretch the system to incorporate different models of play.
In the end 3.5 is pretty flexible in the lower levels but picks up too much steam in the higher levels where every problem/situation will be handled by a caster.
Reminds me of my friend's Pathfinder monk, who grappled a dragon so my Crusader could coup-de-grace him.
Umm... Reaping Maulers are some of the worst grapplers in 3.5
wait, weren't they the grappling based prestige class?
god cavaliers own
Crusader, from Tome of Battle.
They are but that doesn't mean they are good at it (and they aren't).
The real grappling-based prestige class is Black Blood Cultist (Champions of Ruin).
so far, every single D&D character i've made has ridden a dragon successfully for at least 1 round.
PARKER, YOU'RE FIRED! <-- My comic book podcast! Satan look here!
really? cause cavaliers in Pathfinder look like they suck on paper.
PARKER, YOU'RE FIRED! <-- My comic book podcast! Satan look here!
at lvl 16, on a charge on my http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/magical-beasts/dragonne
with a lance and my challenge I was doing over 100 damage PER attack
off my mount I used a keen scimitar, and had like 35 ac and still did almost 60 damage on a non-crit
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/step-up-and-strike-combat
the thing is, cavaliers don't even NEED to be mounted or charge to be terrifying
their challenge ability and bonus feats and banner make them baller as fuck
Pacing depends a lot on the group and the time you have. I like to play it slow and let my players have fun with their role. The horror hits harder when you can immerse them in the mundane. But I'm also gifted with players who bring a typewriter to do their notes on and obses over minor details. Stuff like that does wonders for the atmosphere.
If your group likes fast horror then design the adventure accordingly. Not all Call of Cthulhu adventure have to be library based.
Try to do one in real time. A quick example: Your players are a group of illegal immigrants trying to cross the border in the back of a van. Suddenly there car crashes and they are trapped inside of it. Then the old mexican lady next to them begins to behave weirdly and something not quite human is trying to get in.
The whole thing starts with a car crash and it doesn't get much better, so there shouldn't be any really boring moments. But the best thing here is that you have them in a small place and you can control the pace from the very beginning. Give them enough options like a shotgun in the van, an old mobile radio stuff like that. And if that isn't enough let them mistrust each other.
how many of you touch the door?
That said, yes, yes he was.