Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

[campaign] Search skill

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 3:46:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

I can see three possible solutions to the problem that nobody in the party has
a decent Search skill:

1. Modify my Paladin to allow Search (Take Versatile feat to add Search as a
class skill, up Int to 10 / Dex down to 10, get Search +7, possibly take
the 3rd feat as Skill Focus(search).
2. Replace my Paladin with a Ranger, for whom Search is already a class skill.
3. Create a new NPC rogue with the skills we're missing (Search, but also Open
Lock and Disable Device).

What do the rest of you think is best?
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)

More about : campaign search skill

Anonymous
July 4, 2005 4:18:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

David Alex Lamb <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote:
> I can see three possible solutions to the problem that nobody in the party has
> a decent Search skill:
>
> 1. Modify my Paladin to allow Search (Take Versatile feat to add
> Search as a class skill, up Int to 10 / Dex down to 10, get Search
> +7, possibly take the 3rd feat as Skill Focus(search).
> 2. Replace my Paladin with a Ranger, for whom Search is already a
> class skill.
> 3. Create a new NPC rogue with the skills we're missing (Search, but
> also Open Lock and Disable Device).

I haven't been following, but if you don't have a rogue or ranger, what
are you doing for Spot as well?


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 6:06:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <slrndch02i.usm.keith.davies@kjdavies.org>,
Keith Davies <keith.davies@kjdavies.org> wrote:
>I haven't been following, but if you don't have a rogue or ranger, what
>are you doing for Spot as well?

The orc rogue 3/barbarian 1 has Spot and Listen at 7r. Plus trapfinding. He
doesn't have Open Locks or Disable Device, though.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 6:10:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <da9tdh$p48$1@knot.queensu.ca>, dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca
says...

> I can see three possible solutions to the problem that nobody in the party has
> a decent Search skill:
>
> 1. Modify my Paladin to allow Search (Take Versatile feat to add Search as a
> class skill, up Int to 10 / Dex down to 10, get Search +7, possibly take
> the 3rd feat as Skill Focus(search).
> 2. Replace my Paladin with a Ranger, for whom Search is already a class skill.
> 3. Create a new NPC rogue with the skills we're missing (Search, but also Open
> Lock and Disable Device).
>
> What do the rest of you think is best?

It depends on whether lacking search is that bad because there are
important hidden doors and treasures and such... or becasue there are
many and/or dangerous traps. A paladin with Versatile or a ranger won't
help with traps.

IMC, I allow Trapfinding to be taken as a feat, but that would even more
of an investment for the paladin...


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 6:16:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Peter Knutsen (usenet) wrote:
> David Alex Lamb wrote:
> > I can see three possible solutions to the problem that nobody in the party has
> > a decent Search skill:
> >
> > 1. Modify my Paladin to allow Search (Take Versatile feat to add Search as a
> > class skill, up Int to 10 / Dex down to 10, get Search +7, possibly take
> > the 3rd feat as Skill Focus(search).
> > 2. Replace my Paladin with a Ranger, for whom Search is already a class skill.
> > 3. Create a new NPC rogue with the skills we're missing (Search, but also Open
> > Lock and Disable Device).
> >
> > What do the rest of you think is best?
>
> 3b. Hire an NPC Rogue with basic burglary/dungeon skills.
> There are obviously many such NPCs in the D&D world.

Correct. There are plenty of opportunities to hire NPCs, if the players
want to.

Partly for this reason (and partly for convenience reasons, and party
for power-level reasons), I'm probably going to ban the Leadership
feat.

> Raw 3 sounds as if the GM is sticking his ugly, filthy
> metagame-hand into the game world to save your characters'
> bacon, and that's *wrong*, whereas 3b is a solution that
> works within the game world witout involving any metagame
> entities.

Quick heads-up for everyone involved: I am a fairly dedicated
simulationist (don't expect me to fudge rolls or Deus ex Machina the
PCs out of trouble), but I'm still more interested in running a game
than a world simulation. I'll take simulationism as far as it can be
taken without compromising everyone's fun.

> You also forgot option 4: Try to do without. But that's
> taking a large risk, and it puts a lot of pressure on the GM
> to cheat (i.e. to stick his hand into the game world,
> thereby polluting the purity of the simulation).

To clarify: Search is not mandatory. You can finish the adventure
without it. It's just a big, _big_ help.

Laszlo
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 6:43:16 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

David Alex Lamb <dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca> wrote:
> In article <slrndch02i.usm.keith.davies@kjdavies.org>,
> Keith Davies <keith.davies@kjdavies.org> wrote:
>>I haven't been following, but if you don't have a rogue or ranger, what
>>are you doing for Spot as well?
>
> The orc rogue 3/barbarian 1 has Spot and Listen at 7r. Plus
> trapfinding. He doesn't have Open Locks or Disable Device, though.

Ah, okay. As I said, I hadn't been following.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 7:31:35 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Repent David Alex Lamb!" said the Ticktockman. "Get Stuffed!" David
Alex Lamb replied. Then he added:

> I can see three possible solutions to the problem that nobody in the
> party has a decent Search skill:
>
> 1. Modify my Paladin to allow Search (Take Versatile feat to add
> Search as a
> class skill, up Int to 10 / Dex down to 10, get Search +7, possibly
> take the 3rd feat as Skill Focus(search).
> 2. Replace my Paladin with a Ranger, for whom Search is already a
> class skill. 3. Create a new NPC rogue with the skills we're missing
> (Search, but also Open
> Lock and Disable Device).
>
> What do the rest of you think is best?

I could do the same with my cleric. I have an Int of 12, so I get 4
skills. If I take Versitile, I could take Open Lock & Disable Device.


--
Billy Yank

Quinn: "I'm saying it's us, or them."
Murphy: "Well I choose them."
Q: "That's NOT an option!"
M: "Then you shouldn't have framed it as one."
-Sealab 2021

Billy Yank's Baldur's Gate Photo Portraits
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2xvw6/
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 7:55:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Okay, this is weird, I just noticed that the [campain] tag on this
thread doesn't show up when looking at the list of threads in google...


-Justisaur
July 4, 2005 9:45:24 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On 4 Jul 2005 02:16:12 -0700, laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu dared speak
in front of ME:

>Peter Knutsen (usenet) wrote:
>> Raw 3 sounds as if the GM is sticking his ugly, filthy
>> metagame-hand into the game world to save your characters'
>> bacon, and that's *wrong*, whereas 3b is a solution that
>> works within the game world witout involving any metagame
>> entities.
>
>Quick heads-up for everyone involved: I am a fairly dedicated
>simulationist (don't expect me to fudge rolls or Deus ex Machina the
>PCs out of trouble), but I'm still more interested in running a game
>than a world simulation. I'll take simulationism as far as it can be
>taken without compromising everyone's fun.

IOW, not quite far enough for Peter...


--
Address no longer works.
try removing all numbers from
gafgirl1@2allstream3.net

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com&lt;<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 12:49:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

David Alex Lamb wrote:
> I can see three possible solutions to the problem that nobody in the party has
> a decent Search skill:
>
> 1. Modify my Paladin to allow Search (Take Versatile feat to add Search as a
> class skill, up Int to 10 / Dex down to 10, get Search +7, possibly take
> the 3rd feat as Skill Focus(search).
> 2. Replace my Paladin with a Ranger, for whom Search is already a class skill.
> 3. Create a new NPC rogue with the skills we're missing (Search, but also Open
> Lock and Disable Device).
>
> What do the rest of you think is best?

3b. Hire an NPC Rogue with basic burglary/dungeon skills.
There are obviously many such NPCs in the D&D world.

Raw 3 sounds as if the GM is sticking his ugly, filthy
metagame-hand into the game world to save your characters'
bacon, and that's *wrong*, whereas 3b is a solution that
works within the game world witout involving any metagame
entities.

You also forgot option 4: Try to do without. But that's
taking a large risk, and it puts a lot of pressure on the GM
to cheat (i.e. to stick his hand into the game world,
thereby polluting the purity of the simulation).

--
Peter Knutsen
sagatafl.org
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 4:08:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
> Peter Knutsen (usenet) wrote:
>
> > 3b. Hire an NPC Rogue with basic burglary/dungeon skills.
> > There are obviously many such NPCs in the D&D world.
>
> Correct. There are plenty of opportunities to hire NPCs, if the players
> want to.
>
> Partly for this reason (and partly for convenience reasons, and party
> for power-level reasons), I'm probably going to ban the Leadership
> feat.
>

Aw man, I was actually thinking of taking it for 6th lv so I could get
a pack orc, er... I mean a riding orc... er I mean level my dog...
er...

- Justisaur
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 5:20:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <1120474557.120351.321220@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Okay, this is weird, I just noticed that the [campain] tag on this
>thread doesn't show up when looking at the list of threads in google...

From where I'm sitting it appears that Laszlo and your newsreaders
automatically strip off the [campaign] tags (the subject line changes
when you or Laszlo post)



--
Michael
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NPC rights activist | Nameless Abominations are people too.
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 7:01:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <42c8db91$0$78284$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>,
peter@sagatafl.invalid says...

> > I can see three possible solutions to the problem that nobody in the party has
> > a decent Search skill:
> >
> > 1. Modify my Paladin to allow Search (Take Versatile feat to add Search as a
> > class skill, up Int to 10 / Dex down to 10, get Search +7, possibly take
> > the 3rd feat as Skill Focus(search).
> > 2. Replace my Paladin with a Ranger, for whom Search is already a class skill.
> > 3. Create a new NPC rogue with the skills we're missing (Search, but also Open
> > Lock and Disable Device).
> >
> > What do the rest of you think is best?
>
> 3b. Hire an NPC Rogue with basic burglary/dungeon skills.
> There are obviously many such NPCs in the D&D world.

D00d, that's what he said.

> Raw 3 sounds as if the GM is sticking his ugly, filthy
> metagame-hand into the game world to save your characters'
> bacon, and that's *wrong*, whereas 3b is a solution that
> works within the game world witout involving any metagame
> entities.
>
> You also forgot option 4: Try to do without. But that's
> taking a large risk, and it puts a lot of pressure on the GM
> to cheat (i.e. to stick his hand into the game world,
> thereby polluting the purity of the simulation).

WE MUST NOT POLLUTE THE PURITY OF THE SIMULATION!

This is sounding really kooky, even by your standards.


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 8:38:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Jasin Zujovic wrote:
> peter@sagatafl.invalid says...
>>3b. Hire an NPC Rogue with basic burglary/dungeon skills.
>>There are obviously many such NPCs in the D&D world.
>
> D00d, that's what he said.

No.

What he implied was that Lazlo, the GM, would magically
conjure up an NPC Rogue who would join the party
voluntarily, without getting paid a daily or weekly salary.

>>Raw 3 sounds as if the GM is sticking his ugly, filthy
>>metagame-hand into the game world to save your characters'
>>bacon, and that's *wrong*, whereas 3b is a solution that
>>works within the game world witout involving any metagame
>>entities.
>>
>>You also forgot option 4: Try to do without. But that's
>>taking a large risk, and it puts a lot of pressure on the GM
>>to cheat (i.e. to stick his hand into the game world,
>>thereby polluting the purity of the simulation).
>
> WE MUST NOT POLLUTE THE PURITY OF THE SIMULATION!
>
> This is sounding really kooky, even by your standards.

But that *is* what it's all about: Maintaining the purity of
the simulation, so that the players (and the GM, and any
hypothetical spectators) can engage intellectually with the
game world and with the characters living in it.

After all, the goal of roleplaying gaming is to think like
one's character, and in order to get inside a character's
head, one must be able to understand the world he lives in.
And true understanding cannot be achieved if inexplicable
events take place in the world.

All events must have knowable reasons. Knowable in-world
reasons. Thus any meddling by metagame entities threatens to
throw the roleplayers out of their characters' heads.

--
Peter Knutsen
sagatafl.org
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 8:38:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <42c94991$0$78285$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>,
Peter Knutsen (usenet) <peter@sagatafl.invalid> wrote:
>
>Jasin Zujovic wrote:
>> peter@sagatafl.invalid says...
>>>3b. Hire an NPC Rogue with basic burglary/dungeon skills.
>>>There are obviously many such NPCs in the D&D world.
>>
>> D00d, that's what he said.
>
>No.
>
>What he implied was that Lazlo, the GM, would magically
>conjure up an NPC Rogue who would join the party
>voluntarily, without getting paid a daily or weekly salary.

What I actually meant was that we, the players, would create a 5th member of
the party, which Laszlo would run as an NPC. But it is no longer necessary.
--
"Yo' ideas need to be thinked befo' they are say'd" - Ian Lamb, age 3.5
http://www.cs.queensu.ca/~dalamb/ qucis->cs to reply (it's a long story...)
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 10:06:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <42c94991$0$78285$157c6196@dreader1.cybercity.dk>,
peter@sagatafl.invalid says...

> >>3b. Hire an NPC Rogue with basic burglary/dungeon skills.
> >>There are obviously many such NPCs in the D&D world.
> >
> > D00d, that's what he said.
>
> No.
>
> What he implied was that Lazlo, the GM, would magically
> conjure up an NPC Rogue who would join the party
> voluntarily, without getting paid a daily or weekly salary.

How is it that it is realistic for a PC rogue to join the party without
a daily or weekly salary, but just for the love of company, adventure,
and a share of the loot, but not for an NPC rogue? You wouldn't be using
different logic for NPC than for PC there, would you...?

> >>thereby polluting the purity of the simulation).
> >
> > WE MUST NOT POLLUTE THE PURITY OF THE SIMULATION!
> >
> > This is sounding really kooky, even by your standards.
>
> But that *is* what it's all about: Maintaining the purity of
> the simulation, so that the players (and the GM, and any
> hypothetical spectators) can engage intellectually with the
> game world and with the characters living in it.
>
> After all, the goal of roleplaying gaming is to think like
> one's character, and in order to get inside a character's
> head, one must be able to understand the world he lives in.
> And true understanding cannot be achieved if inexplicable
> events take place in the world.
>
> All events must have knowable reasons. Knowable in-world
> reasons. Thus any meddling by metagame entities threatens to
> throw the roleplayers out of their characters' heads.

Alrighty then. :) 


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr
Anonymous
July 4, 2005 11:04:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

dalamb@qucis.queensu.ca (David Alex Lamb) wrote in
news:D aa5jg$8c3$1@knot.queensu.ca:

> He doesn't have Open Locks or Disable Device,
> though.

Doesn't he use his battleaxe for that? :) 
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 12:17:33 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Mr. M.J. Lush <mlush@hgmp.mrc.ac.uk> wrote:
> In article <1120474557.120351.321220@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
> Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Okay, this is weird, I just noticed that the [campain] tag on this
>>thread doesn't show up when looking at the list of threads in google...
>
> From where I'm sitting it appears that Laszlo and your newsreaders
> automatically strip off the [campaign] tags (the subject line changes
> when you or Laszlo post)

No, it's google. Go to groups.google.com and you'll see the subjects
all have [tags] removed.

Bit of a pain in the ass, really. Those tags are there for a reason.


Keith
--
Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 12:22:01 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

David Alex Lamb wrote:
> I can see three possible solutions to the problem that nobody in the party has
> a decent Search skill:
>
> 1. Modify my Paladin to allow Search (Take Versatile feat to add Search as a
> class skill, up Int to 10 / Dex down to 10, get Search +7, possibly take
> the 3rd feat as Skill Focus(search).
> 2. Replace my Paladin with a Ranger, for whom Search is already a class skill.
> 3. Create a new NPC rogue with the skills we're missing (Search, but also Open
> Lock and Disable Device).

I bought Open Lock /and/ Disable Device, only it was called a
crowbar on equipment table. +6 Str mod does more than damage you know.

> What do the rest of you think is best?

Me bumping some points into Int and doing it myself (Orc Rog/Brb,
for those following along). We'll perhaps need a backup listener though.


Actually, there's a thought, The paladin's got good Con and good
saves, let him find the traps, and let the prisinors tell us about any
secret doors. 8]

--
tussock

Just kidding folks, when the DM says you need Search, you need Search.
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 12:22:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

tussock wrote:
> David Alex Lamb wrote:
> > I can see three possible solutions to the problem that nobody in the party has
> > a decent Search skill:
> >
> > 1. Modify my Paladin to allow Search (Take Versatile feat to add Search as a
> > class skill, up Int to 10 / Dex down to 10, get Search +7, possibly take
> > the 3rd feat as Skill Focus(search).
> > 2. Replace my Paladin with a Ranger, for whom Search is already a class skill.
> > 3. Create a new NPC rogue with the skills we're missing (Search, but also Open
> > Lock and Disable Device).
>
> I bought Open Lock /and/ Disable Device, only it was called a
> crowbar on equipment table. +6 Str mod does more than damage you know.
>

My warlock also has +2 search from racial, unfortunately it's not a
class skill, and the low skills, and pretty much required skills for
the class (umd, concentration) don't allow for much (if any) cross
class skills. I could drasticly change the character and start off
with 1 level of rogue though if it's absolutely necessary.

I'm also strongly considering switching out con for int to get bluff
high.

My character also has a pretty good disable device as well - as long as
it weighs less than 40 lbs, and it isn't magic, she can destroy them
all day long. If it is magic, she effectively has detect magic up all
the time, so finding them shouldn't be a problem.

Another option would be the cleric - find traps *is* a 2nd lv cleric
spell. Not really enough by itself, as it only grants a +2 at 4th
level to search, but combine with goggles of minute seeing (1250gp)
that's +7 and finding traps as a rogue.

And for secret doors, wands of detect secret door are pretty cheap.

> > What do the rest of you think is best?
>
> Me bumping some points into Int and doing it myself (Orc Rog/Brb,
> for those following along). We'll perhaps need a backup listener though.
>
>
> Actually, there's a thought, The paladin's got good Con and good
> saves, let him find the traps, and let the prisinors tell us about any
> secret doors. 8]
>

Actually that's not half bad with a cleric & a paladin healing him
shouldn't be too hard :) 

- Justisaur
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 12:22:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

tussock wrote:
> I bought Open Lock /and/ Disable Device, only it was called a
> crowbar on equipment table. +6 Str mod does more than damage you know.

A crowbar is quite noisy, when breaking up doors, and it
often can't be used on traps. But it'll probably come in handy.

>>What do the rest of you think is best?
>
>
> Me bumping some points into Int and doing it myself (Orc Rog/Brb,
> for those following along). We'll perhaps need a backup listener though.

It's generally useful to have one scout, in the party, who
can move ahead and spy. That requires stealth skills and
good perceptive abilities, as in both of Spot and Listen. So
spreading them out on two characters doesn't sound too wise.

> Actually, there's a thought, The paladin's got good Con and good
> saves, let him find the traps, and let the prisinors tell us about any
> secret doors. 8]

That method of finding traps is costly, in terms of
hitpoints, and Lazlo has just said that he's not going to
pull any punches.

Better stock up (as in purchase with communal funds) several
wands of CLW. If not many. And have the capability to
manufacture more (i.e. take the Feat, somebody) as needed.

--
Peter Knutsen
sagatafl.org
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 12:22:02 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

In article <42c8f132@clear.net.nz>, scrub@clear.net.nz says...

> > I can see three possible solutions to the problem that nobody in the party has
> > a decent Search skill:
> >
> > 1. Modify my Paladin to allow Search (Take Versatile feat to add Search as a
> > class skill, up Int to 10 / Dex down to 10, get Search +7, possibly take
> > the 3rd feat as Skill Focus(search).
> > 2. Replace my Paladin with a Ranger, for whom Search is already a class skill.
> > 3. Create a new NPC rogue with the skills we're missing (Search, but also Open
> > Lock and Disable Device).
>
> I bought Open Lock /and/ Disable Device, only it was called a
> crowbar on equipment table.

Ah, the very essence of the D&D adventurer mentality. :) 

> Actually, there's a thought, The paladin's got good Con and good
> saves, let him find the traps, and let the prisinors tell us about any
> secret doors. 8]

Between this and the above, I think you'd fit well in my group.


--
Jasin Zujovic
jzujovic@inet.hr
July 5, 2005 1:05:55 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 16:38:30 +0200, "Peter Knutsen (usenet)"
<peter@sagatafl.invalid> dared speak in front of ME:

>Jasin Zujovic wrote:
>> peter@sagatafl.invalid says...
>>>3b. Hire an NPC Rogue with basic burglary/dungeon skills.
>>>There are obviously many such NPCs in the D&D world.
>>
>> D00d, that's what he said.
>
>No.
>
>What he implied was that Lazlo, the GM, would magically
>conjure up an NPC Rogue who would join the party
>voluntarily, without getting paid a daily or weekly salary.

Only if you're desperately looking for an example of the GM metagaming
the world. No reasonable person would assume yon NPC rogue was
working for free.

>> WE MUST NOT POLLUTE THE PURITY OF THE SIMULATION!
>>
>> This is sounding really kooky, even by your standards.
>
>But that *is* what it's all about:

No, not really. It's about having fun.

--
Address no longer works.
try removing all numbers from
gafgirl1@2allstream3.net

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
------->>>>>>http://www.NewsDemon.com&lt;<<<<<------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 5:42:06 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:

<snips>
> There are plenty of opportunities to hire NPCs, if the players
> want to.

Always need someone to watch the horses if you've got to go
underground.

> Partly for this reason (and partly for convenience reasons, and party
> for power-level reasons), I'm probably going to ban the Leadership
> feat.

My Cha 6 Orc is not concerned by this news. 8]

> Quick heads-up for everyone involved: I am a fairly dedicated
> simulationist (don't expect me to fudge rolls or Deus ex Machina the
> PCs out of trouble), but I'm still more interested in running a game
> than a world simulation. I'll take simulationism as far as it can be
> taken without compromising everyone's fun.

Sounds great. I fully expect to suffer from our weaknesses as much
as we benefit from our strengths.
See, simulationists don't tweak things to make everyones cool
tricks suddenly useless. That's a good thing, it helps all the time, and
this being an RPG, you can always think your way around the few times
your weak spots come into play: assuming you survive round one.


> Peter Knutsen (usenet) wrote:

>>You also forgot option 4: Try to do without. But that's
>>taking a large risk, and it puts a lot of pressure on the GM
>>to cheat (i.e. to stick his hand into the game world,
>>thereby polluting the purity of the simulation).
>
> To clarify: Search is not mandatory. You can finish the adventure
> without it. It's just a big, _big_ help.

Too late, I'm attached to those extra skill points now, and am even
thinking of dumping Wis a bit more for another lot.

--
tussock

Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 5:46:28 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

tussock wrote:
> Justisaur wrote:
> > laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
>
> >> [...] I'm probably going to ban the Leadership feat.
> >
> > Aw man, I was actually thinking of taking it for 6th lv so I could get
> > a pack orc, er... I mean a riding orc... er I mean level my dog...
> > er...
>
> Snarfi seems pretty light, I'm sure we can sort out a saddle
> that'll fit over Bear's shoulders. Of course, that'd leave you in melee
> range some of the time, and I'm not sure what sort of ACP you'd apply...

Heh, Diablo 2 flashback... (anyone remember those annoying
firebreathing shamen sitting on the shoulders of the other pygmies?)

> Is there rules for PCs using other PCs as mounts anywhere?

Not that I know of. Assuming a proper harness, I'd go with an ACP of 2,
and -2 to all melee attacks. This is assuming that you move and attack
carefully enough to let Snarfi take actions normally, as if he were on
a real mount. You can decide not to take the penalties at any time, in
which case Snarfi is shaken around to the tune of a DC 20 Concentration
check for that round. If you go into a whirling frenzy, it's DC 30. :) 

Laszlo
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 7:06:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Peter Knutsen (usenet) wrote:
>
> After all, the goal of roleplaying gaming is to think like
> one's character,

No, it isn't, Peter. That's the goal of your preferred style of roleplaying
gaming.

--
Christopher Adams - Sydney, Australia
What part of "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn" don't you
understand?
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/prestigec...
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mhacdebhandia/templatel...

Berawler: Is there any sanity or light left in this shrivelled husk of a world?
SingingDancingMoose: There was, but we had to trade it in for the internet.
Berawler: That is quite possibly the best response to any question ever.
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 4:10:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

"Repent !" said the Ticktockman. "Get Stuffed!" replied. Then he added:

>> Snarfi seems pretty light, I'm sure we can sort out a saddle
>> that'll fit over Bear's shoulders. Of course, that'd leave you in melee
>> range some of the time, and I'm not sure what sort of ACP you'd apply...
>
> Heh, Diablo 2 flashback... (anyone remember those annoying
> firebreathing shamen sitting on the shoulders of the other pygmies?)
>

I just had a Mad Max 3 flashback.

--
Billy Yank

Quinn: "I'm saying it's us, or them."
Murphy: "Well I choose them."
Q: "That's NOT an option!"
M: "Then you shouldn't have framed it as one."
-Sealab 2021

Billy Yank's Baldur's Gate Photo Portraits
http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2xvw6/
Anonymous
July 5, 2005 7:10:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Justisaur wrote:
> laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:

>> [...] I'm probably going to ban the Leadership feat.
>
> Aw man, I was actually thinking of taking it for 6th lv so I could get
> a pack orc, er... I mean a riding orc... er I mean level my dog...
> er...

Snarfi seems pretty light, I'm sure we can sort out a saddle
that'll fit over Bear's shoulders. Of course, that'd leave you in melee
range some of the time, and I'm not sure what sort of ACP you'd apply...

Is there rules for PCs using other PCs as mounts anywhere?

--
tussock

Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
Anonymous
July 6, 2005 8:27:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

laszlo_spamhole@freemail.hu wrote:
> tussock wrote:

<snip: Ugh, Diablo II, noooooo ...>

Hmm, I still haven't seen the Diablo expansion for d20, other than
the secret cow level at wizards.com

>> Is there rules for PCs using other PCs as mounts anywhere?
>
> Not that I know of. Assuming a proper harness, I'd go with an ACP of 2,
> and -2 to all melee attacks. This is assuming that you move and attack
> carefully enough to let Snarfi take actions normally, as if he were on
> a real mount. You can decide not to take the penalties at any time, in
> which case Snarfi is shaken around to the tune of a DC 20 Concentration
> check for that round. If you go into a whirling frenzy, it's DC 30. :) 

Hmm, that's differnt than what RotG suggests, now I've looked it
up. Far too easy on the rider in some ways.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/rg
All about Mounts, last bit of #5, refers to parts of #2.

Ride checks are at -5, as Orcs aren't proper mounts, not that you
use them for much other than staying on.
You need an exotic saddle and, _other than the cost and weight_,
saddles and cooperative riders give no penalty to the mount.
As an intelligent mount and rider, both use seperate initiative
checks, and the riders full-round actions are restricted as usual for
riding. It seems to suggest delaying the rider until the mounts turn for
full round actions by the rider.
As an intelligent mount, the rider cannot influence me in any way
with the ride skill, so no extra movement and stuff. Intelligent
creatures don't technically count as a mount, so no mounted combat,
trample, and suchlike apply.

I think the general rules for Concentration checks and Ride checks
for when the mount does various things would be unavoidable. DC 5 to
avoid a fall every round I tumble or frenzy isn't trivial at -5, and DC
10 or 15 concentration is rough at low level too, and shouldn't really
be avoidable.

Anyhoo, just some thoughts. I dare say the Kobold doesn't need the
assist, and it's goblins make good riders anyway. Goblins on Ogres.
Which I'm sure I've seen somewhere.
Ahah, google says Arms and Equipment Guide. Apparently I'd need
trained (via Animal Handling), but it would only take a day at Int 10.

--
tussock

Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
!