|
|
Post by Fluffy the Mad on Dec 19, 2013 23:38:45 GMT -5
I'm going to ask that only those involved in the Ironman Hardcore Adventuring group discussion choose poll options. If I notice numbers out of proportion, I'll either end the poll prematurely or as a DM to help out a little. It's set to end on the 25th.
The options are there and fairly self-explanatory, we'll hammer out details once you guys have shown a preference as to what type of group you want to play.
|
|
|
|
Post by quelunia on Dec 19, 2013 23:44:53 GMT -5
I sitll think with a Perma death as a restriction that we should be a group not wanting ot draw attention to themselves
|
|
|
|
Post by ID10Tango on Dec 20, 2013 0:50:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Kiyohime 🐍 on Dec 20, 2013 0:58:23 GMT -5
Mercenary group because it allows for characters from most of the classes and backgrounds.
|
|
|
|
Post by magiuss on Dec 20, 2013 2:19:59 GMT -5
I voted mercenary i like the idea of multipled allignments  |
|
|
|
Post by gainreduction on Dec 20, 2013 3:45:14 GMT -5
I voted Adventuring, because I don't think my paladin would be a mercenary. Only reason I could see him sign on otherwise is that he was indebted to someone, or he was just spreading the doctrine of Kelemvor.
|
|
malleus
Old School
The first breath is the beginning of death.
Posts: 450
|
Post by malleus on Dec 20, 2013 5:51:51 GMT -5
*The very short story and reason for Father Thomas Wilkinson to join the group*
As the travelling mercenary group came through the Dalelands they took housing in Shadowdale for a few days to get resupplied and have their resent wounds healed.
On their way in to Shadowdale they met an old man by the name of Father Thomas Wilkinson he offers them a place to rest and offered to tread their wounds all free of charge and out of the goodness of his heart.
Father Wilkinson was a cleric of Ilmater although he didn’t live in a temple of his god, he found meaning in his life helping all in need, with no care for why or how someone ended in the need of help, he would give it and ask nothing in return.
Father Wilkinson was never the adventuring type and had lived all his life in Shadowdale; he had taken an oath to never take up arms against anyone or anything.
The mercenary group told him that they where heading for Cormyr for various reasons, and asked him for his healing aid should they need it along the way.
Father Wilkinson knew of the ongoing suffering of war in Cormyr and knew that he would be able to do much good in the land of Cormyr.
It didn’t take him long to pack the few things he owned, *a book that told the dogma of his god.. a few healing potions and a bag of bandages*
The very next day Father Wilkinson set out of Shadowdale for the first time in his life, he found a strange joy in venturing in to the unknown that he had never felt before.
|
|
|
|
Post by Grozer on Dec 20, 2013 13:20:37 GMT -5
I voted mercenaries since it would likely give the most flexibility to character backgrounds.... even potential paladins, i.e. furthering their cause by offering their sword, for which they dont have to take payment of course. However I am open to just about anything to be honest..... so if it goes a different direction or someone comes up with something even better thats fine too.
|
|
|
|
Post by PhatDorf on Dec 20, 2013 14:13:50 GMT -5
My character would probably be able to go with any kind of group, with what I have in mind. Provided that they're "fighting-things" focused  I think you could fit a paladin in with a merc group, provided that their goals are the same and the people they're with are acceptable enough to be around. I cant see them sitting down to go drinking with them, but I can see them arriving 30 mins early before the mission the next morning, all geared up and ready to save everyone |
|
|
|
Post by Trollfiend on Dec 20, 2013 16:20:36 GMT -5
Cyric cult. Do it!
|
|
|
|
Post by Kiyohime 🐍 on Dec 20, 2013 16:59:28 GMT -5
CYRIC CULT! I AM IN.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2013 18:26:33 GMT -5
Guys, I am dreading the idea of playing in a party that includes evil PC's. I've had some really bad experiences with that, and if we're playing for permanent death like this, then I'm about 99.9% ready to write my character out as permanently dead before the group even arrives in Cormyr as part of the group's backstory, if the group has evil PC's in it. I'll hold off on deciding firmly what to do with that issue, but that's the way I am very strongly leaning.
I suggest again the idea of making two parties, one with evil PC's, and one without. With 13+ interested players, I don't that's too big a stretch.
|
|
|
|
Post by MTGPackFoils on Dec 20, 2013 19:03:49 GMT -5
I think a Paladin would tread carefully and then confront evil in the group when they have facts about evil being done.
I think evil in a party with a Paladin would hide to avoid detection.
I am all for an evil party (and can provide one to you outside of this), however I am not going to be evil with this Ironman group.
Also I think we should meet in Suzail not GG when we start.
|
|
|
|
Post by arisnorman1 on Dec 21, 2013 1:02:42 GMT -5
im down for this iron man group i wanna make a barb lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Fluffy the Mad on Dec 21, 2013 2:09:58 GMT -5
That's fifteen votes with a massive outcry for mercenary group. I'll write up a beginning story in the next couple of days and make a new RP thread for organization- if you want to have a particular tie-in for your character, send it to me via a PM and I'll work it in.
|
|
|
|
Post by MTGPackFoils on Dec 21, 2013 2:29:03 GMT -5
You can just grab mine from the first Ironman thread. Page 4.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fluffy the Mad on Dec 21, 2013 2:49:48 GMT -5
You can just grab mine from the first Ironman thread. Page 4. That would fit into the 'particular tie-in' category, but I can add it in to what I work on. |
|
|
|
Post by magiuss on Dec 21, 2013 3:04:27 GMT -5
I have nothing againt evil alling PC's most Rouge's in my head is evil.. due to their nature of stealing from people and most don't really step back from murdering to get that loot.. atleast in forgotten realms.. I agree with unless its Like and outright Blackguard who walks proud an evil I don't have a problem with a little more chaotic selfish type.. Evil has many face's being evil doesn't mean that you have to be in to tortur and stuff.. simply can mean you are a selfish person who don't really give a ratsarse about the people heis travlig with.. and he is using them forhis own gain..
|
|
|
|
Post by Grozer on Dec 21, 2013 10:20:28 GMT -5
So I dont want to make anyone nervous or uncomfortable while playing a game just because I choose to play a certain alignment. I hadn't decided if my PC was going to start out evil but it was likely considering the background story I was developing. I also dont want to be limited by OOC consideration when the RP develops as to the direction my PC goes especially if its because we want to avoid a certain alignment.... PC choices in game become limited. I guess what I am trying to say is you can take me off the list for the group. I think you have plenty of players already and chances are I wont be able to make every session. Have fun! |
|
|
|
Post by gainreduction on Dec 21, 2013 10:49:25 GMT -5
Whats wrong with multi-alignment parties? And what do certain people have against evil or good alignments? Just have fun with it and enjoy the RP.
|
|
|
|
Post by MTGPackFoils on Dec 21, 2013 13:03:12 GMT -5
You should play Grozer. Do what you want in the group. Life should be more fun.
|
|
Ascension
Proven Member
Keeper of the "Dot Dot Dot"
Posts: 150
|
Post by Ascension on Dec 21, 2013 16:34:05 GMT -5
I voted cult, because your going to want a lot of ability to -not die- which means your going to need a lot in the way of healing/revives/ect.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2013 16:43:30 GMT -5
So I dont want to make anyone nervous or uncomfortable while playing a game just because I choose to play a certain alignment. I hadn't decided if my PC was going to start out evil but it was likely considering the background story I was developing. I also dont want to be limited by OOC consideration when the RP develops as to the direction my PC goes especially if its because we want to avoid a certain alignment.... PC choices in game become limited. I guess what I am trying to say is you can take me off the list for the group. I think you have plenty of players already and chances are I wont be able to make every session. Have fun! *cups hand to mouth* 14+ players ... two groups ... |
|
|
|
Post by quelunia on Dec 21, 2013 22:09:56 GMT -5
I would be for two groups, but I fail to see how one persons opinion sways two or more people away. People are making characters before a background was set in stone .. which is fine, but to determine that others cant play their idea because of OOC beliefs and trying to justify them with IC stuff is a bit over the top for me. Sorry guys, but I am out along with Grozer on this too. I wasnt even going to make an evil character, but if the RP led to that happening I dont want to be gimped by the OOC stuff either.
|
|
|
|
Post by MTGPackFoils on Dec 21, 2013 22:25:59 GMT -5
*cups hand to mouth* 14+ players ... two groups ... Ok I understand we could do 2 groups, but I never recall seeing a discussion about this. The reason the group is so large is in case some can not make it (as is the case with holidays and etc happening soon). If you do not wish to play in the group because others may be evil then that's fine. I try to separate OOC and IC stuff as much as I can, however others may not be able to. I would be for two groups, but I fail to see how one persons opinion sways two or more people away. People are making characters before a background was set in stone .. which is fine, but to determine that others cant play their idea because of OOC beliefs and trying to justify them with IC stuff is a bit over the top for me. Sorry guys, but I am out along with Grozer on this too. I wasnt even going to make an evil character, but if the RP led to that happening I dont want to be gimped by the OOC stuff either. Don't let the actions of one turn you away from something you would enjoy. This applies to anything in life. |
|
|
|
Post by quelunia on Dec 22, 2013 0:22:55 GMT -5
*cups hand to mouth* 14+ players ... two groups ... Ok I understand we could do 2 groups, but I never recall seeing a discussion about this. The reason the group is so large is in case some can not make it (as is the case with holidays and etc happening soon). If you do not wish to play in the group because others may be evil then that's fine. I try to separate OOC and IC stuff as much as I can, however others may not be able to. I would be for two groups, but I fail to see how one persons opinion sways two or more people away. People are making characters before a background was set in stone .. which is fine, but to determine that others cant play their idea because of OOC beliefs and trying to justify them with IC stuff is a bit over the top for me. Sorry guys, but I am out along with Grozer on this too. I wasnt even going to make an evil character, but if the RP led to that happening I dont want to be gimped by the OOC stuff either. Don't let the actions of one turn you away from something you would enjoy. This applies to anything in life. Her is the deal, I come here to have fun, the idea sounded fun. So.. the reason I dont want to get in the mix of this... One, we are being asked to accept Perma Death, which means we will have to work together as a team. We will need to put alot of effort into these characters before we even leave a town.. not to mention in towns if we happen to have nemesis characters about. I am all for spliting the group good and evil. That is fine with me, but if we are going to be all in one big group and have our characters alignments dictated before hand, I cant do that. I have played an evil character that was redeemed, I totally understand that some people just cant handle the evil aspect of the alignment spectrum, so rather than ruin the fun of one I will abstain. Because what your going to have is a wedge issue between us. I am all for developing our characters adn I am glad to see paladins, but what is to say that RP wont create a fallen paladin? What is to say that the quasi evil guy wont have the paladins rub off on him? But before we even have a chance there is an issue and that I cant and wont waste my time on a characters development. |
|
|
|
Post by Fluffy the Mad on Dec 22, 2013 1:11:05 GMT -5
No alignments have been dictated. There is a little issue with premature character creation, but we can work with that, I suppose. This is not, at the moment, going to be a 'good' or 'evil' group, as far as I am aware or concerned. If I'm making the centerpiece, they'll be a neutral character and we can play both sides of the coin. With such a large group it will be split between tasks of various sorts, not to one alignment or the other. The 'leader' I am creating won't be dumb enough to assign a paladin to assassination or a rogue to guarding orphans holding bags of silver. If you want to make an evil character to get along with the good guys, do it the smart way. I doubt stupidity will be tolerated. That means not picking inter-group fights without a good bloody reason. We're all intelligent adults, I'm pretty sure we can sort this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2013 1:14:09 GMT -5
I am a big fan of what you are trying to do with the ironman group. Perhaps our experience with the Refugee's will be some small help to you in forming this group. We had more than 10 express interest before play, 10 that gave a character idea to the group, and 7 that showed up for the first two nights. We are now down to 3 of the original group and have 2 members recruited after a few months of play and possibly one new member starting next week (I hope.)
What I am saying is you are doing great to have so much interest, but you should expect to lose a few here and there along the way. Some are bound to see the group develop in a way that does not suit them, but there will be another group idea coming along that may suit them better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rane on Dec 22, 2013 2:08:38 GMT -5
So I dont want to make anyone nervous or uncomfortable while playing a game just because I choose to play a certain alignment. I hadn't decided if my PC was going to start out evil but it was likely considering the background story I was developing. I also dont want to be limited by OOC consideration when the RP develops as to the direction my PC goes especially if its because we want to avoid a certain alignment.... PC choices in game become limited. I guess what I am trying to say is you can take me off the list for the group. I think you have plenty of players already and chances are I wont be able to make every session. Have fun! *cups hand to mouth* 14+ players ... two groups ... Roleplay it. There shouldn't be an alignment rule. You should roleplay in the group and try to out the evil person. This group is entirely voluntary so it's completely your fault if something you don't like happens. |
|
|
|
Post by MTGPackFoils on Dec 22, 2013 2:16:14 GMT -5
*cups hand to mouth* 14+ players ... two groups ... Roleplay it. There shouldn't be an alignment rule. You should roleplay in the group and try to out the evil person. This group is entirely voluntary so it's completely your fault if something you don't like happens. Also here is another way to think about this: In real life a group of people go out on the town. In that group you are going to have someone who is greedy, selfish, and wants all the attention to him or herself. Another person may be nihilistic, or bring the whole group down. Another is naïve, carefree, and believes in the good of all, and yet another wants to keep everyone (and everything) together. This is what I envision with the Ironman project. Let's role play, not roll play. |
|
