[dungeoncrawl] Re: Thursday morning summary
- From: Johnathan Detrick <jdetrick@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: dungeoncrawl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 14:27:20 -0400
So will Faceous be able to relay this information to the group, or
will it come through role-playing?
jimkaren@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Oops - mouth zipping shut. Will say no
> more. :) OK, maybe I should. We're
> not DMing here, so I'll say that it
> comes to you from Faceus himself. Only
> those who are currently played in the
> active group (or those who replace
> them) will be eligible for godhood.
>
> That knowledge may resolve much of the
> convolution problem - the group can be
> structured as you (the players) see
> fit. I want to resist saying why this
> is so; even party members who are dead
> will still be eligible if they meet one
> particular criteria - and everyone you
> played in the fight last night already
> meets it.
>
> So far, everyone else doesn't.
>
> >
> > Nadan doesn't want to be a god,
> but I don't care if he becomes one.
> > It would certainly get the guy out of
> the way. :)
> > I assume you mean just the
> characters we are currently playing?
> >
> > jimkaren@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > > Hopefully, next week should serve to
> > > shed some light on where things are
> > > headed. Believe it or not, the
> road to
> > > godhood is already being paved - for
> > > better or for worse.
> > >
> > > Let me take this opportunity to ask
> an
> > > important question: does anyone
> have a
> > > character in the current group that
> > > they do not want to see become a
> god?
> > > (Important: I'm not saying this in
> > > terms of what the character wants,
> but
> > > in terms of what the player wants).
> > >
> > > In the end, instead of failing, the
> > > characters might find a divine
> destiny
> > > to be unavoidable.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > In the end, what will really
> > > disappoint or upset me is an ending
> > > > that doesn't allow us a chance to
> > > retire these characters. Do I hope
> > > > that they will become gods? Yes I
> > > do. I am so excited about writing
> > > > these guys and girls up as
> deities!
> > > I can't wait! However, if it
> > > > doesn't happen, it doesn't happen.
> > > As long as it doesn't end stupidly.
> > > > Let me put it another way. I
> > > don't want the end to be something
> > > > contrived. So far you have never
> > > gone in the direction I intended,
> yet
> > > > you have continued to do things
> that
> > > made sense and were lots of fun. I
> > > > have faith you will keep doing
> that.
> > > >
> > > > jimkaren@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > 1. I had to chuckle when you
> > > brought
> > > > > up the fact that NPCs give such
> > > > > constant abuse to characters. I
> > > hadn't
> > > > > thought of that, and had to
> respond
> > > > > without reading the rest. Very
> good
> > > > > point! As for Elminster, he
> had a
> > > lot
> > > > > on his mind: powerful wizards
> > > seeking
> > > > > godhood, vast sources of power
> > > leaking
> > > > > into the realms, etc etc. A bit
> > > harsh,
> > > > > but in line for him (at least
> from
> > > what
> > > > > I've read over the years).
> I'll now
> > > > > read the next section:
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. I'm getting a sense of
> relief
> > > from
> > > > > reading section 2 as well. For
> some
> > > > > reason, I just don't have a
> problem
> > > > > with Baish! I should, and I
> > > remember
> > > > > the character giving you
> tremendous
> > > > > headaches as a DM. I think I've
> > > hit on
> > > > > a "aha!" moment here: I'm
> really
> > > > > overwhelmed by roleplaying
> > > spellcasters
> > > > > in 3rd edition, not by character
> > > > > personalities. It was reeeallly
> > > tough
> > > > > running both Amrikals and not
> having
> > > > > them annihilate everyone and
> > > everything
> > > > > around them. I just don't have
> a
> > > firm
> > > > > enough grasp of 3rd edition
> magic.
> > > > >
> > > > > 3. Yes, it does make sense. I
> left
> > > > > last night mentioning two
> things to
> > > > > Matt and Damon: (1) How to DM
> your
> > > > > powerful characters (which we
> > > discussed
> > > > > today), and (2) how terrified I
> am
> > > of
> > > > > this plot.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm loving it, and I'm glad
> everyone
> > > > > else is having fun, but there's
> > > bound
> > > > > to be some controversy from what
> > > > > happens next! As each week
> > > progresses,
> > > > > the danger level is going to go
> up.
> > > > >
> > > > > Some of that "controversy"
> concern
> > > > > comes from my knowledge of
> things to
> > > > > come that won't necessarily be
> > > popular
> > > > > with the players - the events
> might
> > > > > even come across as a "wet
> blanket"
> > > of
> > > > > sorts.
> > > > >
> > > > > For example, Gadget and Faceus
> > > weren't
> > > > > captured by Mylena - Tyr sent
> them.
> > > > > They both have a specific
> mission:
> > > > > Faceus to prevent the group from
> > > > > succeeding, and Gadget to deal
> with
> > > > > Klaw.
> > > > >
> > > > > For an example of what concerns
> me,
> > > > > I'll mention one idea now that I
> > > won't
> > > > > use in play: I considered
> having
> > > the
> > > > > gods send a messenger to the
> Riders
> > > in
> > > > > Sigil. They could return of
> their
> > > own
> > > > > volition, or sacrifice all godly
> > > aid.
> > > > > That would mean no spells or
> > > abilities
> > > > > for any of the priests, among
> other
> > > > > things. But I've thought of a
> > > > > different, more democratic way
> that
> > > > > they will handle the problem,
> and it
> > > > > ain't going to be pretty
> either! :)
> > > > >
> > > > > That's why I feel like taking
> these
> > > > > things to their logical
> conclusions
> > > is
> > > > > going to make me as much a
> dreaded
> > > DM
> > > > > as Dan Robinetti.
> > > > > :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
Other related posts:
