OOC: Please Start Here.   Posted by GM.Group: 0
GM
 GM, 283 posts
Thu 8 Sep 2016
at 19:44
Something about sausage?
Feel free to react to the latest post, in or out of character. To complete the mission, the party will navigate the piles of junk. We'll figure out exactly what this means.

You can establish things you want to be true about the contents of the vault. What I've tried to establish is:
Owned by a giant.
At least some of the contents are related to creation forging, the same process that created you.
Most of what's in here is ancient and decrepit.
It's dark, but there are noises.
The contents are piled deeply and you're at floor level, so it towers above you.
There are paths through.
Graven
 player, 91 posts
 Warforged Swordmage
 Runecarver
Sat 10 Sep 2016
at 13:36
Something about sausage?
I'm holding off on posting IC cause I want to give other people the chance to post, but I am here!
GM
 GM, 286 posts
Mon 12 Sep 2016
at 17:20
Something about sausage?
A goblin has triggered a hazard. At present, only it will be targeted. If you are interested in trying to act, roll initiative. If you can beat the initiative of the hazard, you try to do something, though the avalanche can't be stopped.
GM
 GM, 287 posts
Tue 13 Sep 2016
at 13:43
Something about sausage?
After about 24 hours, I'll assume no one took action to try to save the goblin.
GM
 GM, 288 posts
Tue 13 Sep 2016
at 15:00
-
Even though he can't take a mechanical action in time, Graven can still "react" emotionally or verbally if you want. Same, obviously, for anyone else.
Azm
 player, 48 posts
 Cycle of The Sun
 1 Action Point
Tue 13 Sep 2016
at 20:18
-
I hate to do this, but I am going to have to bow out. I have a lot of things on my plate right now and just cannot balance rpol with them. thanks for the opportunity and a fun game.
GM
 GM, 290 posts
Tue 13 Sep 2016
at 20:36
-
In reply to Azm (msg # 384):

No problem, thanks for letting us know. All the best.
GM
 GM, 291 posts
Tue 13 Sep 2016
at 21:54
-
I'll formally remove Azm shortly, so that the game doesn't keep cropping up on their main menu. I want to give everyone time to reply to their last message.

How is everyone else feeling? I'm feeling better about this excursion into the vault, so I'm happy to run it on through. Azm can get lost in the maze of junk or otherwise get separate from you. Or we can skip ahead. Or we can try to recruit more players, though I assume you all feel the roles are still adequately covered.
GM
 GM, 292 posts
Thu 15 Sep 2016
at 18:33
-
You're likely expecting more information from me. I'll be happy to provide that, I just want to get a sense for where the player base stands, before I spend time writing up stuff that won't necessarily get used.
Graven
 player, 93 posts
 Warforged Swordmage
 Runecarver
Thu 15 Sep 2016
at 20:39
-
I'm okay going forward with just the three of us, but is Chopper still with us?
GM
 GM, 293 posts
Fri 16 Sep 2016
at 15:45
-
In reply to Graven (msg # 388):

Doesn't really seem like it, does it?

Well, I'm leaning toward calling this. It's been a good learning experience for me, in terms of making encounters and running combat without a map. I think I've also learned that I'd like to start things more in the middle. The Frostfell has given me a lot of options for intriguing situations, but I realized what I really wanted was for the warforged to have to deal more with civilization. If we were to decide to continue, I'd want to discuss jumping the game ahead to dealing directly with people who hate and fear them, and with completing the long-term mission, instead of just surviving.
Chopper
 player, 109 posts
Fri 16 Sep 2016
at 20:38
-
I am still lurking. Sorry. I got a bit lost and real life got a bit crazy.

I like the idea of civilization and I wouldn't mind advancing the characters a bit. Would we stay level 1 or move up a few levels?
GM
 GM, 294 posts
Fri 16 Sep 2016
at 20:54
-
In reply to Chopper (msg # 390):

I'd be up for advancing the characters within the Heroic tier.
Chopper
 player, 110 posts
Fri 16 Sep 2016
at 21:44
-
Do you have a milestone level that you prefer? I was thinking 6 or 9...
GM
 GM, 295 posts
Fri 16 Sep 2016
at 22:03
-
In reply to Chopper (msg # 392):

I'd prefer no higher than 5 for starters. I'm nervous about the complexity.
Chopper
 player, 111 posts
Fri 16 Sep 2016
at 22:23
-
In reply to GM (msg # 393):

I trust your judgement!
Graven
 player, 94 posts
 Warforged Swordmage
 Runecarver
Sat 17 Sep 2016
at 03:33
-
Yeah I wouldn't want to jump too far forward in level. 4 is a good place, I think.
GM
 GM, 296 posts
Sat 17 Sep 2016
at 22:54
-
Smith, are you good with moving to 4th level?

As part of such a move, we'd come up with how the party gets out of their current situation and gets to their new situation. It wouldn't be in great detail, but enough so we have a sense for how the characters got to wherever it is they end up, why they're more advanced and maybe a bit about what happened to Azm. This would help us determine the kinds of threats and advantages they have available.

If we are agreed to migrate to 4th level, I'll also bump the request for players, and modify the character creation guidelines.
GM
 GM, 297 posts
Tue 20 Sep 2016
at 13:06
-
It's been more than a week since Smith was on.

I think I'll draw this game to a close now, rather than try to keep it going. I had a positive experience and I hope you did too, once some wrinkles were worked out. I'd like to run more 4th Edition games on this site, and if you'd like to know about them I'd be willing to contact you via this game, which I will keep in existence for the time being.

I'd be interested in feedback you have to offer. I'm dedicated to working without a map, so I'm not open to suggestions to the contrary, but I'd be open to easily-implemented adjustments to the approach.

I'd also like to hear any ideas for games you'd be interested in participating in. I feel like the biggest problem on this site is with GMs coming up with ideas and hoping players find them interesting. It's a problem with the whole hobby, actually. In my ideal world, players and GMs would collaborate on the game they want to see, so that they'd all be dedicated to seeing the idea come to fruition.

If you're reading this, it's been good playing with you, and I wish you luck.

engine
Graven
 player, 95 posts
 Warforged Swordmage
 Runecarver
Thu 22 Sep 2016
at 20:04
-
I enjoyed myself here too, engine. Definitely send me a message if you start another 4e game. I think 4e games and also pbp games do best when they're very combat-focused, and at least gently railroaded. I love the idea of GMs and players collaborating on the ideal game, but in practice I worry that getting too much player input on what is happening and what will happen kills player immersion, and contributes to them losing interest. Does that make sense?
GM
 GM, 298 posts
Thu 22 Sep 2016
at 20:32
Re: -
Graven:
I enjoyed myself here too, engine. Definitely send me a message if you start another 4e game.
Will do!

Graven:
I think 4e games and also pbp games do best when they're very combat-focused, and at least gently railroaded.
I'd certainly like to focus mostly on action, if not pure combat, but I think the players really have to be on board with that, and the characters have to have the right kind of personality for it. I like combat in 4e more than the other editions and most other systems, but I never believed it was intended to be the focus, but was just the part that needed to be the most structured.

But running the game the players want is why I prefer to be even more collaborative than I tried to be here.

Graven:
I love the idea of GMs and players collaborating on the ideal game, but in practice I worry that getting too much player input on what is happening and what will happen kills player immersion, and contributes to them losing interest. Does that make sense?
It does make sense, but what I've found is that there are different kinds of immersion. I can describe what I mean if you want, but basically it can and does work for people to help create the game experience, even as they play in it. That doesn't mean it can or does work for everyone, so I try to be as up front as I can about my approach.

I know open, explicit collaboration is a challenging sell on this board. Still, I'll keep at it, and see what I can modify about it to make it more appealing.

Thanks for the feedback.
Chopper
 player, 112 posts
Thu 22 Sep 2016
at 21:27
Re: -
I started a new job and though I am sad to let this game go, I haven't had the time to give it. I will send you some feedback, but overall I have enjoyed it! I am growing more partial to maps, but I do like the more descriptive version you have endeavored for here.

One thing to look at would be the range increments from the Fantasy Flight Games Star Wars game, it's a pretty simple way to gauge distance while still allowing for the freedom of descriptions.
GM
 GM, 299 posts
Thu 22 Sep 2016
at 21:58
Re: -
In reply to Chopper (msg # 400):

I'm not truly against maps, though I find them a hassle for online games, and I find they can be very limiting and require more than gentle railroading to make sure the effort of making and using them doesn't go to waste.

I'll be honest, part of why I want to do mapless play is to show it can be done. It was a key selling point of 5th Edition (though as far as I can tell, most people use maps with that game, too), and I like being able to show (to the extent I have been, which might be just to myself) that 4e can do it too.

I'll look into the range interval idea. I actually used something like that, trying to use words like "engaged with," "adjacent to," and "near" in consistent ways. After the first two encounters I tried to go a lot more simplified too, and 4th Edition doesn't tend to involved very long ranges, since most characters and monsters don't have abilities that go more than 10 squares or so.

Thanks for the feedback, and I'm open to any more you have.
Smith
 player, 96 posts
Tue 4 Oct 2016
at 14:36
Re: -
Hey all. Sorry... holidays hit, and my regular routine of checking rpol suffered along with it.

Um... really sorry if I accidentally killed the game. =/
GM
 GM, 300 posts
Tue 4 Oct 2016
at 15:51
Re: -
In reply to Smith (msg # 402):

Thanks for checking back in. No, I don't think it was you, I think it was starting to flag anyway with Azm leaving, and it felt right to me to end it. No hard feelings on any side, I hope.