Starstruck, are you still willing to run the game?

I guess Starstruck has lost interest in GMing 4th ed?  I didn't see him advertise for an adventure nor did I receive an invite.  If anyone knows otherwise, please advice.  Thanks.

In reply to Soulforge (msg # 15):

No I haven't seen anything. I might post something in the Interest Check thread, to see what kind of game people might be up for. I don't have time at the moment, but maybe soon, for something short.

edit: I don't have time to run something, that is. I do I have time to play.
This message was last edited by the user at 18:47, Sun 09 Oct 2016.

If I had a PHB1 and a DMG I'd do it, but as it stands now, that would be like going to a gun fight without bullets.

I might be swayed to run this - I got plenty of books, and have run 4ed here - along with plenty of other games since joining in '05.
It will not be KoTs unless it is with the Alexandrian update which does a great job of correcting the errors it had. rather, I would look to other options.

The problem I have is that I am unsure which to run - An easy entry and shake together of the group is to dig down into my throve of 4ed adventures, for instance the friendly 'Escape from Sembria' which dictates Faerun which I am very familiar with and take it from there.

Essentially, I have every intention of making this last, but naturally, what is the interest for something like this - its a good time to be picky, voice opinions and refine what is desired. At the earliest, due to sick children, it won't start until tuesday or so next week for my sake but wanted to offer it. Is there any interest in this?

Didn't see this response till now.

I like Faerun and would be good with any other adventure.

I missed the response too. Weird.

I'm okay with Faerun, as long as we won't be expected to know the setting in great detail.

I kind of liked 4E actually. I mean it was more like a videogame than an RPG in some cases but the balance between spellcasters and non-spellcasters was nice. I'd be up for a game if it happens.

Sounds fun to me

My plate is full on Gming. If not for that I would run a 4e game. But like anybody else said, if you find a DM...

Sorry, I don't have anything to offer game-wise, but I think it is funny that everyone feels the need to preface any discussion about 4e with an apology. I won't get into why it's good, but there are a lot of great things about 4e...

...

(rolls will save, Fails)

Ok, here's why. 5e could not have happened without 4e, and I don't just mean numerically.

4e introduced cantrips as a go-to attack for spellcasters.
4e introduced the proficiency bonus (rather then penalty) for weapons.
4e streamlined saves. 4e improved skills and skill proficiency.
4e introduced class paths
4e gave identity to fringe classes like the warlock

And so much more.

Look, I am by no means an expert on 4e, but you can almost look at 5e as edition 4.5. It did a lot of things well, for the first time. If you like 4e, then brother, roll with it. It is a very playable system.

Ok, fiiine I will do something.
But there's a catch -well some catches-.


1.- It will run kind of slowly.
2.- I will take two groups of max 5 PCs each.
3.- In combat each group will control the monsters of the other group.
4.- Someone in the game has to DM for me, because I want to play too.  (I have a particular request out there but if it is too much a 4e game, 13th age, or 5e game open to homebrew/3rd party will do). If we get to halfway November and nobody has made room for me we cancel the whole deal.

Is this acceptable? (If acceptable rmail me)
This message was last edited by the user at 02:14, Sat 22 Oct 2016.

Summary of those posted an interest in playing 4e:
engine (Started the thread)
Soulforge
LonePaladin
deraxeman
dulldreams
jkeogh
Wh1stl3r
mesneaky
LunarKitty



The_Law_of_Poe:  Don't have the time to respond however since I didn't preface my comments with an apology I don't feel the need to respond either.


LunarKitty:
1. This is play by post, which inherently runs slow.  How slow were you thinking?
2. Only 8 have posted an interested but I'm sure 2 more could be found.
3. I'm sure you can see the issue with this.  PBP is a slow game, having players move the monsters will make it even slower.  So not really a good method to run a game.
4. I don't really understand this request.  If you are playing in one of the groups, isn't your request already meet?

Any offer with that many catches is bound to fail.  While I don't speak for the group, my personal response is thanks, but no thanks.

Ok, let me explain everything.

1.- Slow. I guess this is not the most accurate way to say it. Not exactly slow, but more like on and off. I'm a steady poster as a DM, daily or every third day, but from time to time it can be up to four days in a row without a DM Post. My  life is unpredictable and sometimes things happen.
2.- No more than ten people in game, I could run just one group of five tops, but the idea is to accommodate as much players as possible. So two groups of Max 5 and not a single player beyond that.
3.- I will still play the monsters, but anybody in group A will also be able to handle the monsters in group b and the other way around. So in this way combat gets to be faster than with just me controlling the monsters, If I'm somehow offline at the time and a player in the other group can post, he or she does and things keep moving. (And with possibly better tactics)
4.- If I'm Dming, I obviously won't be playing. It wouldn't be fair to saddle you with a DM PC, but I still want to play as a player, and it doesn't have to be 4e if nobody has the time. Maybe the ultimatum was uncalled for, and I'm sorry about that, but the basic idea, I'm sure somebody out of the ten players can possibly make some room for me too?

Somehow I keep missing when threads I'm interested in are updated.

I'm okay with a slow game but if we know it's going to be slow maybe there's a way we can still keep it appealing. I have some ideas, but I won't clutter up this thread with them.

I agree with a cap on 5 per game. Nice to want to accommodate as many people as possible with more games, but starting and running one game is hard enough, especially if one has only irregular time to host.

I like the idea of having multiple people on hand to operate game elements, though I've never seen something like that executed and I'm not sure how it would be.

I still don't understand the final point? You're asking for a trade, as in you GM a group and someone in that group also GMs a game in which you're a player? That seems like a reasonable request, actually, if that's what you mean.

Yes I was telling about a trade. Anyway we could certainly limit ourselves to a single group too. As for everything, Google docs for a combat tracker and map will certainly help to speed combat. And somehow I've got a little more time on my hands too.

Storywise I have a couple of ideas.

The first one, start with an adventure on a lost mine in the mountains looking for the lost hoard of a dead dragon. Which is also a race against time with a group of goblins, some bugbears and a secret society with their own secret agenda that culminates on the discovery of something else.

The other one is to go with the setting here: link to another game be it in the current time period (where no magic is seen as harmless), a little right after the collapse of the big empire (where people were more ambivalent) or set during the later times of the empire with a quest to get an imperial favor (wizard magic ok, witches illegal)

Of course I could cook up something else if it suits you.

If you want a combat manager and map-maker, you can't do better than Masterplan -- especially because it was designed specifically for 4E. It handles initiative, ongoing damage, saves, skill checks, attack and damage rolls, all that. Heck, with the right libraries you can even make dungeon maps using facsimiles of the official map tiles.

And it's free.

Unfortunately, the program's website seems to have gone down. The last snapshot on the Wayback Machine is from late July; I don't know if the download links work, but you can try it.

If it doesn't work, and you want it, send me an rMail and I'll hook you up. I still keep a copy for those times where I decide to run a 4E game.

I like the "lost mine in the mountains" idea.

I'm not sure I could run a game in trade just now, unless it was very simple, but I'd be open to discussion about it over rMail.

Ok lets move the talks to Rmail I might have something set on Saturday or Sunday. What are your preferences on starting level and stuff?

Just to update.

I would be willing to run the Revised version of the Keep on the shadowwell and the whole storyline.
I will run it with the Alexandrian conversion, which optimizes and binds the story together.
For a player it will present a more fluid, and adaptable game which binds together much better than the broken mess the original was.

Aside one so far showing interest, would anyone else be into this?
My intent is to run it for the coming years, but naturally - a game is no stronger than it's players, regardless of GM effort, and the players intent to focus on proceeding as a unit(which is key in 4e) while also staying true to their characters, is something I have to ask the players to consider. Can those here advise if this is what you desire? If so, let me know and I will raise a game.

I'm not sure what the conversion is but if it makes things better then that sounds good.

Ok, this is the game I promised. (Mature, but just in case)

link to another game

Regardless, I have opened the game for the revised edition of the Keep of the Shadowfell, so if interested, please apply here:
link to another game

This message was deleted by a moderator, as it was against the forum rules, at 03:25, Tue 24 Jan 2017.

I also recently started a new 4E game. link to a message in another game We're starting with the first Scales of War but won't necessarily stick to that path.