Looking for a mid to high level D&D 3.5 game.

Okay, I'd like to try this again now that I've played more than 3.5 face to face and am getting back into the mood to do 3.5 on RPOL again.

Here are my requests

Rules:
*Point buy (rather than random) ability scores generation.
*Gestalt
*Starting level anywhere from 7th to 15th.

Setting:
I prefer that the setting be something I can learn as I play. I know Faerun okay, but still not very well, and Greyhawk somewhat but still not much. I really don't want to play in Ebberron or anything that has that steampunk feel; it's not for me.

Post Rate
I can post 2-4 times a week, and most days multiple times. I'd prefer others have about the same rate. I'm relaxed on this though, preferring slower over faster so I don't get overwhelmed with content on Monday.

Genre
I'm looking for mostly roleplaying, and use of abilities outside of combat, but with combat in there when the situation calls for it. I really would prefer combat be meaningful and necessary when rolled out rather than arbitrary XP. I don't wnat the game devoid of combat, but also don't want this game to have it as the focal point.

It'd be nice if posting and roleplaying XP were given, but it's not a sticking point as I'd rather not level without a single combat either.

Playstyle
Heroic campaign where the PCs are trying to help people or better the world in their own way. Teamwork in the group is a must, and loner characters be penalized or just not admitted. I don't mind conflict, but don't enjoy bickering within the group on a frequent basis.

Sources
I'd like the books I have access to be allowed. I can provide the full list if necessary. I'm also willing to cut down on my source material if I have some choice in the discussion.

That's it. Hopefully that's not to too much to ask.

I will second this request.

  Always open to such a game, and V-V's a good player.

I would also be interested in this.

I started a game like this a while back. We got through the first 'arc', mostly getting out of the story set up. It's slowing down now though, so tips on how to rejuvenate things would be appreciated.

I had a few personal hiccups, especially with that mimic, mainly with how I ran some of those combats, but I'm understanding how to make things more fluid. Also fights are easier to plan out after you've seen the party in action.

Take a read, tell me what you think.

link to another game
This message was last edited by the user at 06:48, Mon 02 June 2014.

The explanation provided below is to help define what I'm looking for in hopes to find the closest match for my internal aspirations. I feel that while it address an outside source it is still germane to my central query.

---

In reply to criticalmass1984 (msg # 5):

Your house rules really intrigue me, but they are still nonetheless a major departure from D&D's prescribed genre. Permanent death, limitation on monstrous races and planar omission from the cosmology does bring new opportunities, but it also takes a leap from D&D into a different genre (or sub-genre if you want to resort to semantics).

I say this for two reasons. First, I am interested, yes! The idea of having to come to terms with the occasional tragedy of an innocent's death or see a hero become a martyr, are great story elements. But...and this is equally important, it does not fulfill my desire to play D&D.

While I did not explicitly state I wanted a more traditional D&D 3.5 "feel" I certainly anticipated that to be assumed.

While it uses a similar rules set and glosses over conflicts therein, it is no longer the same genre. After all, you can have a spell that explodes into fire on impact, an alchemical potion you throw that explodes on impact, a grenade launcher, or any other manifestation that has long range and does 10d6 fire. The fact is a fireball is not, in my eyes, the same as a grenade launcher or hurled alchemical potion despite clear similarities.

The same is true of changing cosmological constants (such as planar reduction), diversity of sentient creatures (such as the monster manual abridging, with most of those being projected imagination of a caster rather than naturally occurring), and severity of death (murder is always far more serious, even unto evil, when there is no return from it).

So while I will certainly send a RTJ, I'm afraid I'm still looking for the game listed in my first post.

See first post please
I'm once again in search of this game. One of my GMs has recently killed their game, which frees a slot for me as a player.

I'd like to see a new face too. So if you know me from another game, I'd ask you to wait so I can see if there's someone new I might have a chance to play under. Of course, on the other hand, if you want to jump in as an interested player, then by all means.

I would be an interested player as well...

I'd definitely be interested in playing in a game like this.

With so much interest shown, let's bump this thread.

I'd like to play as well

Work has finally settled into something normal, so I'm interested if this game happens.

In reply to srgrosse (msg # 12):

Well that's nine players so far. I'm always surprised at the GM to player ratio on RPOL. Face to face, every group I've been with, even those where players suggest specific types of games, it's like sharks fighting over fresh meat. EVERYONE wants to GM face to face and it's actually harder to find players. So it's a pleasant shift.

So I guess we're nine riders with not a steed nor place to go between us.

So...I guess I'll bump this.

If there's still room for interested players I'd like to be a part.

  Well, it's been over a week, so I'll reiterate what I posted before:
    Always open to such a game, and V-V's a good player.

Having never had a chance to play in gestalt game, I've often thought of running one. My ideas for it though center around one tree of the gestalt being locked into one class, such as Rogue, Wizard, or Cleric.

First idea was a group of Rogues, all members of the same Thieves' Guild in a city where crime is pretty rampant.  PC's would have to take Rogue for all levels for part of their gestalt, but leaving the other half for whatever they wish.  This could take place in any 'world' easily enough.

The other was in Faerun, just after the Time of Troubles.  All PC's would have to take Cleric for half their gestalt.  Additionally, instead of sacrificing spells for Healing, they would sacrifice to a domain, picked during character creation.  They would form a sort of council, traveling the world of Faerun/Toril, seeing what other changes have been wrought upon the land after the gods were made mortal.

Are any of those ideas viable?

Having one side of the progression be just straight one class isn't bad. However, locking it into being a SINGLE class for everyone is a little... eh, lets just say it chafes a bit.

Locking in one side as a single class would help to reduce some of the potential craziness you see in gestalt builds, however. And it is certainly worth considering. Instead of doing "Everyone must have Rogue on that side", consider loosening that to being a 'roguelike' class. This allows for a wider range, since it would open it up to things like bards, scouts, ninjas, spellthieves, and the like.

For the Faerun game, instead of Cleric, expand that to be 'divine casters'. That opens up Paladins, Druids, Rangers, Favored Souls, and so on. Makes things much more interesting.

I'd be OK with that, but I might restrict the classes a bit more than that. Rogue could include Bard, Scout, and Spellthief, but I would not do anything with the Oriental classes. I'd consider other skill-based classes, but they should fit something that works within a Thieve's Guild operation.

As far as the cleric thing goes, I'm not sure on loosening up on that one. The whole campaign idea centers around the gods, and how they have changed after the Time of Troubles.  The big change is that clerics can no long sacrifice spells to heal (or harm), instead sacrificing spells to a domain. There are enough gods in the Realms to pick and choose something that should appeal to a player/character.  Paladins, Druids (who worship nature gods, instead of spirits) and Favored Souls don't get into that aspect.  This would include all the various monster races as well. Lizard-men, goblinoids, orcs, etc.  I would want to encourage use of Diving Channeling feats.

Yes it would chafe perhaps, but the ideas I would explore, would have to involve a more invested relationship then that of Paladins, Druids, and Favored Souls usually have with their deities. Heck, as I understand the class of Favored Soul, they sometimes don't even realize who they are being favored by!

I would consider loosening the restriction to needing half of the one tree having to be Cleric, giving more room for specialized builds. e.g. At 8th level, you had to have 4 levels of cleric somewhere in your build.  Would that improve the likability of the idea?

Not really, no. Just remember, while you may have ideas you want to explore, the players might not care that much. 'Forcing' them to care because you're making them take a class that is directly impacted in a major way by what you want to explore is more than a little railroad-ish. And some players may find more enjoyment observing the effects from the outside looking in. Some players may not care about that at all, and are focused on their own personal goals (saving up to build a temple in their home town, getting revenge on the person/group that wronged them, etc.). A 'divine' themed game, where one side of the class is a Divine caster of some sort works well for a variety of playstyles and character motivations, and thus is more likely to get players committed to the game, and keep them interested if 'clerics have one of their core features radically changed' is just one thing out of many going on, instead of the whole focus of the campaign.

That being said, radically changing one of the core features of a class (sacrificing spells to heal/harm) is going to have a MAJOR impact on how that class plays. Make sure that it remains balanced. The relative strength of this change will vary GREATLY depending on what domains are chosen, afterall. I would honestly suggest moving away from this idea. There's plenty of crazy going on in the Realms after the Time of Troubles, since the power of the gods is now directly related to their followers, without changing things up like that.

Very well. What about the Thieve's guild idea?  Does it have any merit?  If permitted a 'selected list of classes' instead of just Rogue, would that appeal to folks?

Yeah, the Thieves' Guild idea rocks. A group of tricksters, rogues, and ne'er-do-wells can make for a really interesting campaign. And I'd definitely be down for that kind of game.

Your other idea isn't bad, per se. In fact, a divine-themed game in the wake of the Time of Troubles is a kick-ass idea. But there are major balance issues with changing a core part of the cleric class that way. Without going outside the core domains, consider the comparison between a cleric with the Chaos and Death domains, and a cleric with the Knowledge and Travel domains. Chaos and Death cleric is going to be FAR more powerful than Knowledge and Travel cleric. And it gets worse once you step outside of the core books. Having all clerics channel either positive or negative energy, and sacrificing spells to do cure or inflict spells, keeps them on an even keel.

The divine game, minus the change to clerics, would also make for a bad-ass campaign. The idea is a good one, and you should hold on to it. Work on it some more, and come up with a hook that doesn't involve changing core components of a class. You have some solid ideas, but even a diamond needs cutting and polishing before it shows its worth.

  Really up to V, of course, but for the cleric idea they could all start off as clerics (possibly cloistered) and then pick prestige classes that have, say, at least 50% divine casting progression - giving quite a range of choices.

The domain sacrifice idea is actually something from Unearthed Arcana as a variant for clerics.  I thought it was a rather cool idea if all clerics did that. Perhaps as an "addition" rather than "in exchange". So a cleric could then choose to sacrifice spells for healing, harming, or to a domain spell of thier choosing.  Again, just a thought.

The Thieves Guild idea I think has more 'openness'. I am firm believer in players generating where they want to take a story.  If there is a lot of interest in this, I would be willing to give it a shot.  I'd likely use Faerun though. I am very familiar with the campaign world, spending much of my D&D career there in 1st & 2nd editions (about 10 years).

I'm game with the Realms, as well. RA Salvatore's books are what drew me to D&D, so you could say I've got a special place in my heart for the Realms.

I have just started this game: link to another game and while it says it is a Pathfinder game, I was thinking of adding a second group if I got enough solid RTJ's, and frankly, I don't see why I couldn't make the second group a D&D 3.5 group. From the looks of things, there is more than enough interest here. If you are interested let me know.
P.S. We'll use Greyhawk, because grease and blood is better than faeries and magic.

I'm OK with it. And honestly I would like to try playing in a gestalt game before I try to run with one.  That said, once through the first few rounds, I might still like to run a game.