Not so much, they are the leaders of the religion, but a lot of people in Foarland tolerate the religion rather than follow it. Much how religions work IRL, some people follow the rules to the letter, others are a lot more relaxed with it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The most important step a person can take is always the next one." -Dalinar Kholin; Oathbringer
Crusades as a rule are bad news. No one ever wins a 'holy war' in my opinion fantasy or reality! As for Warmfather follower based on Mo's world build and notes as well as Phade/Barlow's posts I'm gathering Warmfather followers are a bit cocksure and above it all. Based on my PCs background however ALL religions are misguided attempts to control others. That's why she's a personal honor code paladin not faith based!!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.
For followers of the Warmfather, we’ve met Ladle, Valen, and Galius (me). I’m not sure that’s an ample sample size to make much of a generalization, especially since two are players winging it.
ps: you are super passive aggressive, please knock it off. You’ve made remarks about how you think players should play, and twice you’ve made little digs at people outside of the game, now with Barlow and once before about a player writing inner monologue. Dial it back, it does not make this fun or help anything along.
My suggestions are just that, suggestions. You disagree if you'd like but it doesn't make YOUR opinions anymore valid than mine of the material or how I'm to play off it. I'm basing my assessments off of what I've read as well as real history of crusades/religious movements that I'm sure Mo has taking a page or two from. MY interpretation is just that mine. You can play how you like I'll continue to play how I'd like. Warmfather followers are all <insert adjective here>. I'm playing off other players and explaining movitations here as we're meant to via Mo's instruction. Passive aggressive how? I didn't call anyone out by name because it's an honest observation I've had playing 3000+ posts of PbP. If you feel targeted by it, it says more about you than me dude. I just wanted more people talking and doing stuff because inner dialogue is impossible to play off of in PbP.
P.s. next time you've got a problem with ONLY me PM me like an adult and don't put me on blast in public forum.
Yeah, no, it's not a statement of arrogance. It's the stance of someone who was raised by a particular organization and seeing people openly criticize them by lumping into a group of fanatics. Indoctrination can happen in these situations, but Valen's order was written up as a semi-mercenary force of knights and healers. They have a regionally-established presence, but do not seek expansion . Rather, they send emissaries to seek those needing assistance and small forces for larger problems.
Just like how many religions have their darker sides, the few don't represent the whole. The DM's description of the crusade specifically stated that proponents are either followers of Dawn and Dusk, or those who see gains from a war. That leads me to believe that it's a small population of Warmfather followers. If there's character tension due to preconceptions, that's understandable. However to simply make blanket statements due to the limited interactions with 2-3 people is presumptuous.
As a side note for the DM, what are your views on the appearance of Aasimar/Sunblessed? I had always envisioned them the same as humans but with a naturally exceptional charisma or personality. Is there something that openly gives them away here?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Characters:
Grishkar Darkmoor, Necromancer of Nerull the Despiser Kelvin Rabbitfoot, Diviner, con artist, always hunting for a good sale Bründir Halfshield, Valor Bard, three-time Sheercleft Drinking Competition Champion, Hometown hero
I'm not making a blanket statement do you see how disagreeing with my interpretation doesn't make me wrong and you right, it's just a difference of opinion? I'm allowed to interpret it based on my PCs backstory as much as your are! Hence my PCs statement that Warmfather followers are self righteous because in her experiences with them (in my backstory) they are villains as much as any other religious order that is geared to be the 'bad guys' the Nightspawn. In my PC backstory ALL religions are bad but people can be good. I don't get how either of you can get so heated about 1 fictional info that others are interpting just like you only gleaning a different perspective 2 a PC response to described 'petty' comment being petty/snide back 3 someone's opinion being different than yours somehow makes them wrong but you right?! I never said either of you are wrong. I simple said why my PC doesn't see your PCs religion the way you see it, it's an opinion we're ALL allowed to have them!!
Sheesh man, y'all make DnD too much work. I was having a great time until THIS BS.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.
Also NO one fully knows anyone's backstory yet so problems are going to happen in-game that can be worked out via RPing but if you're going to get personally butthurt about everyone not thinking your PC is the best it's going to be a hard road ahead!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.
I’m not mad about the character conflicts or your personal opinion of the setting, although I do think it’s a premature conclusion. I’m upset because you’ve made several posts here in the OoC thread with negative commentary about how people are playing their characters. You post it under the guise of a suggestion, but it’s still just negative commentary, which is why I said you’re passive aggressive. I posted it here so if anyone else felt the same way, it would be clear that it wasn’t just them. I don’t have any issues with your character, I have issue with how you try to tell people how they should play. Please stop that.
I think now would be a good time to take this to pm so we can hash this out without this ending in “either he goes or I go.” Please understand I want this resolved, and I’m not looking to chase you off. I’d like the end result to be that you stop using OoC as a means of making PA digs at people’s playstyle, or character choices.
No, I'd rather not. You've called me out on here so I'm asking you on here to provide the proof for what you're claiming I'm guilty of! I think really this is down to an imagined slight and the actual facts. If you can't share examples of me dictating PC game play which you've accused me of its because they don't exist. I'm playing my PC how best I can based on my understanding and interpretation of game lore as well as other PCs posts trying to avoid the pitfalls of PbP metagaming. But if you think asking others why they made a choice they did or what their PCs motivations are because something they've done confuses me then offering an opinion of how I've played in the past is 'dictating how a player should play their PC' then you're mistaken. Asking for clarity or sharing opinions about pitfalls I've come across playing PbP isn't the same as telling somehow how to play the game. If we fumble a rule or miss a detail and someone corrects us are you going to consider that passive aggressive too or just a helpful nudge?
Also NO one fully knows anyone's backstory yet so problems are going to happen in-game that can be worked out via RPing but if you're going to get personally butthurt about everyone not thinking your PC is the best it's going to be a hard road ahead!
Who is claiming to be the best? Everything left in the campaign thread thus far has been fine and civil, but every time I see posts in OOC, it's nothing short of antagonistic. We aren't talking about character knowledge anymore, we're talking about someone trying to meta into other player's roles. Per your request:
1. Asking why Galius is charming everyone and insinuating that there's malicious intent. If you want to make a joke, make it seem like a joke rather than a personal critique. The entire conversation on the matter reads as you coming after a player, not joking or looking for clarification.
2. "Crusades as a rule are bad news. No one ever wins a 'holy war' in my opinion fantasy or reality! As for Warmfather follower based on Mo's world build and notes as well as Phade/Barlow's posts I'm gathering Warmfather followers are a bit cocksure and above it all." Where do you assume anyone places themselves above others? There has never been a single hint of trying to play superiority in campaign. You say your character interprets A, but then come here and assert the same as though it's canon for everyone to follow. In the DM's exact words, the crusade in question is being largely supported by religious fanatics and ambitious manipulators. So where does this opinion of arrogance come from?
4. After the first encounter, you stated there were two incidents of people stealing spotlight in the healing role. However in the beginning of the opening thread, you mentioned wanting to be more of a traditional Tank. It creates confusion over what your desires as a player are and rather that you want to do everything instead. I intentionally switched from Wizard to Cleric to provide more healing support.
We don't roll initiative DM does. He's UK time so I bet he's asleep. He's asking you to react to the sound of bray mules you haven't got a clue what's going on my dude you were asleep.
Yeah right I got that. Seems appropirate that a hired soldier would react aggressively to the sound of the pack animals being attacked and large forms moving, right? Passive perception allowed a level of awareness to the situation as the DM pointed out.
This whole campaign was made toxic within the first few days. There's never been anything suggesting player manipulations or hostility in the campaign thread, but you are very quick to throw down the gauntlet here and claim it's just your character's opinions (i.e. post #164). I'm leaving the campaign as I should have from the onset when I was being directed by another player on what should or shouldn't be noticed despite DM ruling. Best of luck Mojake.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Characters:
Grishkar Darkmoor, Necromancer of Nerull the Despiser Kelvin Rabbitfoot, Diviner, con artist, always hunting for a good sale Bründir Halfshield, Valor Bard, three-time Sheercleft Drinking Competition Champion, Hometown hero
To address your imagined slights. I was curious about the way he was playing a glamour bard and if he was creating allies before what I thought would be an encounter in the bar. Because you know bar fights and the like which is a common trope in DnD. More allies made by enthralling presence which makes ppl become your bodyguards too as a feature of the spell. Misinterpreted intent as you did my intention for the question. I also explain my attempt to joke failed and then apologied.
As for stealing spotlights when?! I mentioned I heal people before other PCs then healed those same ppl because I thought my posts were being overlooked.
Toxic how? Because I PM'd you ONE time about something I misread as the DM was supposed to roll for us as a nudge and one's ability to react to things being asleep? DM clarified the roll I was talking about and the rest you explained as the soilder thing which I gave a thumbs up! Then a messaged you about posting a picture 101 which I thought would be helpful since you didn't know how, apparently not!
As for canon and not I'm saying what I interpret and why makes it tge only way, you can take it or leave it. How by just sharing an opinion does it mean it's the only one that counts or some how challenges or should overrule someone else's? I repeat both our opinions on the fictional religions can/are valid.
My PC does find all religions essentially useless and their followers misguided but that doesn't mean I'm attacking you as a player for creating a PC who's got faith it just means my PC doesn't believe in your PCs cause.
This doesn't mean we can't play together either but you're going anyway so...not really sure where to go with that. I guess this means you think somehow having some differences of opinion means you can't compromise 'agree to disagree' and to move forward.
Best of luck in your future adventures Barlow! I thought Az's skeptism/cynicism was an interesting foil to your faith-based PC.
Wow - a lot happened while I was asleep. Firstly, this is a real shame, I have enjoyed this so far and bad-feeling and conflict (between players) is never good, but is there no opportunity to move through things here? If I looked at Barlows list I'd say
1 - Possible tones issues in the question initially, I could see it from both sides and it could have been slightly more carefully written however I don't read it as an attack on the player.
2 - I thought that the part you have quoted from AA's post was referring to a character behaviour choice and as such completely fair game - I can only speak for my own posts but I deliberately have posted with Conor on a couple of occasions to be obnoxious, including religious condescension towards the half-elven members of the group. He is an antagonistic character, willfully trying to ruffle feathers. I therefore take AA's comment with a bit of pleasure because they've "got" what I was going for. I can't speak for Valen as a character but I didn't see him as the shy and retiring type regarding religious views.
4 - seems a bit of a non-issue to be honest, from both sides - there was lots of healing to be done, and several healers - from a tactical use of resources spreading the heals makes more sense but probably not a big enough deal either way for either player to get bent out of shape over.
5 - Barlow, if you don't like the tone, of course you have complete freedom to respond accordingly, it seems like you answered sensibly, maybe it's a good thing to say in the pm, thanks but not happy with the tone, in the future etc etc. I have to say though it doesn't seem like a particularly aggressive or critical pm, but maybe my skin is just too thick - and I'm not criticizing you just saying I generally don't get caught up in trying to deal with tone in emails and private messages personally.
Whilst I've hopefully not just fanned any more flames (because for me the best outcome would be everyone putting the earlier difficulties behind them and cracking on with what I believe is going to be an awesome pbp with a bunch of players who have some good skills and characters with a great amount of potential to be interesting for a long while, and finally because we are all lucky enough to have a dm who has clearly worked bloody hard on setting this up and is doing a great job so far.) can I say one thing that may or may not provoke a reaction. Clearly some people had a issue with AA calling out "inner monologue" posting earlier in the game, well I didn't say anything then (possibly should have done) but I agreed, there was too much of it and it was a bit annoying - since that post, whatever your take on it was, the posting has been significantly better, characters have interacted with each other, a lot of detail about people has been "verbalised" rather than "internalised (?)" and therefore we can honestly use them as platforms from which to roleplay. Whatever the upshot of the argument above I hope people see that difference I'm trying to highlight and I think that AA was right to try to bring it to our attention.
One last thing, something I've really liked about this campaign, which I don't recall experiencing in any of the other 20+ games I've played here on the site is that the character group didn't immediately try and be best friends - it wasn't pistols at dawn but there were tensions, and this is a good thing between characters, it provokes us into doing better, going deeper with the roleplay, it's the reason I'm here - it could take a year for me to get Conor up to level 4 and I wouldn't care if the rp was good. The only thing that matters is that the dynamics are about the characters not the players, let's not spoil something and let's have our characters do their thing, whatever that is.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vhon - Level 2 Warlock - What shall become of the Drunken Sailor?
It looks like you've gotten yourselves into something of a tiff whilst I've been away this weekend, so I'd like to offer my opinions as DM. Despite numbering my opinions, they are not in response to the numbering done by any previous posters.
Tone is hard to convey over text and always has been. I don't need to explain this, as we've been in the 21st century for almost 2 decades now. People misinterpret the comments of others all of the time. We don't know each other personally, and do not know each others' tolerance for jokes or whether people are susceptible to making them. I for one enjoy banter among a group, and welcome people making the odd joke in, or out of, character. Saying that, I can understand nschrock's concern. Initially, AA's comments in this thread did strike me as passive aggressive. However, as an adult, I gave him the benefit of the doubt about his intended tone and moved past it. I don't think it has been an issue for a while.
When grievances are aired, the adult thing to do is have a reasonable discussion to work them out instead of taking them personally - especially on a platform such as this, where tone is not easily conveyed. Both AA and nschrock came in quite guns-blazing with their comments yesterday, and things became heated quickly as a result. Grievances should be made by PM, or failing that, through me. Remember that anybody on this site can read your comments, not just those in the campaign - which could have consequences when applying for later games, as I personally looked at each applicant's previous posts when recruiting.
In-game inter-party conflict is a thing that should be celebrated. A party who all agree with each other is done to death. AA made an in-game generalisation and was brought up on it out of game. That is not fair, and is only fair if it can be likened to OoC prejudices, which I don't believe he displayed. If, for example (and I'm purposely using characters not involved in this tiff), Conor offended Lucina, the best way for nitemarereality to convey annoyance could be by having he punch Conor in the face. I'm not saying this needs to happen, but I've had my characters attack other characters non-lethally if it seems justified.
If anybody has a problem in this campaign, whether with me, another player or campaign content, please tell me. I feel disrespected that a player has left my game without consulting me or giving me chance to work towards a solution, as it reflects on me and makes me feel like I have failed as a game master. This is the first time a player has left one of my games in almost ten years of playing.
Everybody has the right to ask another player why they made a decision out of character. Make sure that you are careful and respectful with wording it, however. AA asked Galius why he charms people, which is fine, however the below quote - which was probably meant as a joke - can absolutely be interpreted as calling somebody out.
Dudes, I know how glamour bards work. What I am asking why he's trying to charm them. So, charming them out of coin and to protect you is your aim? Audience-based cannon fodder?
Everything that Phadeout said in the post above mine stands; and the way he has phrased it has allowed me to shorten my reply considerably for fear of repetition, so thank you for that. Culture on the internet has widely become automatically hostile, but we're here to have fun and play some D&D. Prior to starting, Laserwhit expressed that he wasn't comfortable with swearing, and everybody has respected that - which is fantastic. Keep up the respect, and put this argument behind you. I will message Barlow, and invite him back now that I've had my say. If he chooses to return, fantastic. If not, then we move on.
Finally, does anybody else have any grievances to share? Now is the time, I implore you. I will have to forgo making a post in the campaign thread today, as I have work to do and have already spent enough time formulating this reply. If I have a productive day, I may be able to post tonight, but expect it tomorrow.
I hope that we can all work past this without losing any more members, you've so far all been great players, and I feel disconcerted by this sudden disagreement.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The most important step a person can take is always the next one." -Dalinar Kholin; Oathbringer
I apologize for my part on this and I do not hold any grudges. I love this game and I realize my honest curiosity has riled people up. I want to know more about characters to understand who to play off them better which I guess in the end is a little meta and blew up in my face. I appreciate people giving me the benefit of the doubt that my intentions were misinterpreted. I truly think this campaign is one of the most unique on the board or I wouldn't have tried for it. Everyone should know that I never intend my comments or queries intagonistically but curiously or as a bit of fun. I never have made a decision about tone over the internet because of such things. Unless you've used obvious language to make me think otherwise I'm always going to consider your intentions are good because we're all playing a game for fun. As for character's behavior will/can only be interpreted as its written or as a PCs backgrounds dictates. If we're sitting around a table or around the world looking at a screen regardless of our difference we all love this game and want it to be the best game possible. I think that's the real argument here.
I never intended to offend, just help or joke. I think I've explained my character's intentions ad nauseam too so I won't again but from here on out my questions and comments are honest and have good intentions. As for my jokes may they be funnier/discernable or may I never roll another Nat 20 again. Seriously sorry Mojake.
I'm sad to see Barlow leave and I'm hoping we can get past this speed bump and continue some awesome roll playing in Mojake's very creative world. I appreciate the heart felt thoughts and concerns expressed and several of you have said things better than I would have so let's take the best of what has been advised and forgive the rest or chalk it up to misunderstandings and move forward. We have some wonderfully creative people here and should be able to have a great time.
Just wanted everyone to know that I'm on board and hope we can enjoy the game.
Barlow and Nschrock I apologize that you found my humor humorless and my help unhelpful. It was not intended to offend nor was my honest intentions to help/better understand character motivations meant to question your abilities as players. My words will always have good intentions because they are wholeheartedly meant to be helpful or funny or a learning curve for me as a player. What is this game if not an amalgamation of guidelines and ideas then a multi-view interpretation of those guidelines/ideas!
Okay, so you could be a worshipper of the Warmfather without being.a follower of Dawn or Dusk? Which I assume are Lesser deities?
Paladin - warforged - orange
Not so much, they are the leaders of the religion, but a lot of people in Foarland tolerate the religion rather than follow it. Much how religions work IRL, some people follow the rules to the letter, others are a lot more relaxed with it.
"The most important step a person can take is always the next one." - Dalinar Kholin; Oathbringer
Okay, I think I’ve got a better grasp, thank you
Paladin - warforged - orange
Crusades as a rule are bad news. No one ever wins a 'holy war' in my opinion fantasy or reality! As for Warmfather follower based on Mo's world build and notes as well as Phade/Barlow's posts I'm gathering Warmfather followers are a bit cocksure and above it all. Based on my PCs background however ALL religions are misguided attempts to control others. That's why she's a personal honor code paladin not faith based!!
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.
For followers of the Warmfather, we’ve met Ladle, Valen, and Galius (me). I’m not sure that’s an ample sample size to make much of a generalization, especially since two are players winging it.
ps: you are super passive aggressive, please knock it off. You’ve made remarks about how you think players should play, and twice you’ve made little digs at people outside of the game, now with Barlow and once before about a player writing inner monologue. Dial it back, it does not make this fun or help anything along.
Paladin - warforged - orange
My suggestions are just that, suggestions. You disagree if you'd like but it doesn't make YOUR opinions anymore valid than mine of the material or how I'm to play off it. I'm basing my assessments off of what I've read as well as real history of crusades/religious movements that I'm sure Mo has taking a page or two from. MY interpretation is just that mine. You can play how you like I'll continue to play how I'd like. Warmfather followers are all <insert adjective here>. I'm playing off other players and explaining movitations here as we're meant to via Mo's instruction. Passive aggressive how? I didn't call anyone out by name because it's an honest observation I've had playing 3000+ posts of PbP. If you feel targeted by it, it says more about you than me dude. I just wanted more people talking and doing stuff because inner dialogue is impossible to play off of in PbP.
P.s. next time you've got a problem with ONLY me PM me like an adult and don't put me on blast in public forum.
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.
Yeah, no, it's not a statement of arrogance. It's the stance of someone who was raised by a particular organization and seeing people openly criticize them by lumping into a group of fanatics. Indoctrination can happen in these situations, but Valen's order was written up as a semi-mercenary force of knights and healers. They have a regionally-established presence, but do not seek expansion . Rather, they send emissaries to seek those needing assistance and small forces for larger problems.
Just like how many religions have their darker sides, the few don't represent the whole. The DM's description of the crusade specifically stated that proponents are either followers of Dawn and Dusk, or those who see gains from a war. That leads me to believe that it's a small population of Warmfather followers. If there's character tension due to preconceptions, that's understandable. However to simply make blanket statements due to the limited interactions with 2-3 people is presumptuous.
As a side note for the DM, what are your views on the appearance of Aasimar/Sunblessed? I had always envisioned them the same as humans but with a naturally exceptional charisma or personality. Is there something that openly gives them away here?
Characters:
Grishkar Darkmoor, Necromancer of Nerull the Despiser
Kelvin Rabbitfoot, Diviner, con artist, always hunting for a good sale
Bründir Halfshield, Valor Bard, three-time Sheercleft Drinking Competition Champion, Hometown hero
I'm not making a blanket statement do you see how disagreeing with my interpretation doesn't make me wrong and you right, it's just a difference of opinion? I'm allowed to interpret it based on my PCs backstory as much as your are! Hence my PCs statement that Warmfather followers are self righteous because in her experiences with them (in my backstory) they are villains as much as any other religious order that is geared to be the 'bad guys' the Nightspawn. In my PC backstory ALL religions are bad but people can be good. I don't get how either of you can get so heated about 1 fictional info that others are interpting just like you only gleaning a different perspective 2 a PC response to described 'petty' comment being petty/snide back 3 someone's opinion being different than yours somehow makes them wrong but you right?! I never said either of you are wrong. I simple said why my PC doesn't see your PCs religion the way you see it, it's an opinion we're ALL allowed to have them!!
Sheesh man, y'all make DnD too much work. I was having a great time until THIS BS.
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.
Also NO one fully knows anyone's backstory yet so problems are going to happen in-game that can be worked out via RPing but if you're going to get personally butthurt about everyone not thinking your PC is the best it's going to be a hard road ahead!
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.
I’m not mad about the character conflicts or your personal opinion of the setting, although I do think it’s a premature conclusion. I’m upset because you’ve made several posts here in the OoC thread with negative commentary about how people are playing their characters. You post it under the guise of a suggestion, but it’s still just negative commentary, which is why I said you’re passive aggressive. I posted it here so if anyone else felt the same way, it would be clear that it wasn’t just them. I don’t have any issues with your character, I have issue with how you try to tell people how they should play. Please stop that.
Paladin - warforged - orange
Give me an example please because I have NO clue what you're talking about! To whom and when have I told people how to play their characters?
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.
I think now would be a good time to take this to pm so we can hash this out without this ending in “either he goes or I go.” Please understand I want this resolved, and I’m not looking to chase you off. I’d like the end result to be that you stop using OoC as a means of making PA digs at people’s playstyle, or character choices.
Paladin - warforged - orange
No, I'd rather not. You've called me out on here so I'm asking you on here to provide the proof for what you're claiming I'm guilty of! I think really this is down to an imagined slight and the actual facts. If you can't share examples of me dictating PC game play which you've accused me of its because they don't exist. I'm playing my PC how best I can based on my understanding and interpretation of game lore as well as other PCs posts trying to avoid the pitfalls of PbP metagaming. But if you think asking others why they made a choice they did or what their PCs motivations are because something they've done confuses me then offering an opinion of how I've played in the past is 'dictating how a player should play their PC' then you're mistaken. Asking for clarity or sharing opinions about pitfalls I've come across playing PbP isn't the same as telling somehow how to play the game. If we fumble a rule or miss a detail and someone corrects us are you going to consider that passive aggressive too or just a helpful nudge?
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.
Who is claiming to be the best? Everything left in the campaign thread thus far has been fine and civil, but every time I see posts in OOC, it's nothing short of antagonistic. We aren't talking about character knowledge anymore, we're talking about someone trying to meta into other player's roles. Per your request:
1. Asking why Galius is charming everyone and insinuating that there's malicious intent. If you want to make a joke, make it seem like a joke rather than a personal critique. The entire conversation on the matter reads as you coming after a player, not joking or looking for clarification.
2. "Crusades as a rule are bad news. No one ever wins a 'holy war' in my opinion fantasy or reality! As for Warmfather follower based on Mo's world build and notes as well as Phade/Barlow's posts I'm gathering Warmfather followers are a bit cocksure and above it all." Where do you assume anyone places themselves above others? There has never been a single hint of trying to play superiority in campaign. You say your character interprets A, but then come here and assert the same as though it's canon for everyone to follow. In the DM's exact words, the crusade in question is being largely supported by religious fanatics and ambitious manipulators. So where does this opinion of arrogance come from?
4. After the first encounter, you stated there were two incidents of people stealing spotlight in the healing role. However in the beginning of the opening thread, you mentioned wanting to be more of a traditional Tank. It creates confusion over what your desires as a player are and rather that you want to do everything instead. I intentionally switched from Wizard to Cleric to provide more healing support.
5. PM sent at start of the first fight:
We don't roll initiative DM does. He's UK time so I bet he's asleep. He's asking you to react to the sound of bray mules you haven't got a clue what's going on my dude you were asleep.
Yeah right I got that. Seems appropirate that a hired soldier would react aggressively to the sound of the pack animals being attacked and large forms moving, right? Passive perception allowed a level of awareness to the situation as the DM pointed out.
This whole campaign was made toxic within the first few days. There's never been anything suggesting player manipulations or hostility in the campaign thread, but you are very quick to throw down the gauntlet here and claim it's just your character's opinions (i.e. post #164). I'm leaving the campaign as I should have from the onset when I was being directed by another player on what should or shouldn't be noticed despite DM ruling. Best of luck Mojake.
Characters:
Grishkar Darkmoor, Necromancer of Nerull the Despiser
Kelvin Rabbitfoot, Diviner, con artist, always hunting for a good sale
Bründir Halfshield, Valor Bard, three-time Sheercleft Drinking Competition Champion, Hometown hero
To address your imagined slights. I was curious about the way he was playing a glamour bard and if he was creating allies before what I thought would be an encounter in the bar. Because you know bar fights and the like which is a common trope in DnD. More allies made by enthralling presence which makes ppl become your bodyguards too as a feature of the spell. Misinterpreted intent as you did my intention for the question. I also explain my attempt to joke failed and then apologied.
As for stealing spotlights when?! I mentioned I heal people before other PCs then healed those same ppl because I thought my posts were being overlooked.
Toxic how? Because I PM'd you ONE time about something I misread as the DM was supposed to roll for us as a nudge and one's ability to react to things being asleep? DM clarified the roll I was talking about and the rest you explained as the soilder thing which I gave a thumbs up! Then a messaged you about posting a picture 101 which I thought would be helpful since you didn't know how, apparently not!
As for canon and not I'm saying what I interpret and why makes it tge only way, you can take it or leave it. How by just sharing an opinion does it mean it's the only one that counts or some how challenges or should overrule someone else's? I repeat both our opinions on the fictional religions can/are valid.
My PC does find all religions essentially useless and their followers misguided but that doesn't mean I'm attacking you as a player for creating a PC who's got faith it just means my PC doesn't believe in your PCs cause.
This doesn't mean we can't play together either but you're going anyway so...not really sure where to go with that. I guess this means you think somehow having some differences of opinion means you can't compromise 'agree to disagree' and to move forward.
Best of luck in your future adventures Barlow! I thought Az's skeptism/cynicism was an interesting foil to your faith-based PC.
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.
Wow - a lot happened while I was asleep. Firstly, this is a real shame, I have enjoyed this so far and bad-feeling and conflict (between players) is never good, but is there no opportunity to move through things here? If I looked at Barlows list I'd say
1 - Possible tones issues in the question initially, I could see it from both sides and it could have been slightly more carefully written however I don't read it as an attack on the player.
2 - I thought that the part you have quoted from AA's post was referring to a character behaviour choice and as such completely fair game - I can only speak for my own posts but I deliberately have posted with Conor on a couple of occasions to be obnoxious, including religious condescension towards the half-elven members of the group. He is an antagonistic character, willfully trying to ruffle feathers. I therefore take AA's comment with a bit of pleasure because they've "got" what I was going for. I can't speak for Valen as a character but I didn't see him as the shy and retiring type regarding religious views.
4 - seems a bit of a non-issue to be honest, from both sides - there was lots of healing to be done, and several healers - from a tactical use of resources spreading the heals makes more sense but probably not a big enough deal either way for either player to get bent out of shape over.
5 - Barlow, if you don't like the tone, of course you have complete freedom to respond accordingly, it seems like you answered sensibly, maybe it's a good thing to say in the pm, thanks but not happy with the tone, in the future etc etc. I have to say though it doesn't seem like a particularly aggressive or critical pm, but maybe my skin is just too thick - and I'm not criticizing you just saying I generally don't get caught up in trying to deal with tone in emails and private messages personally.
Whilst I've hopefully not just fanned any more flames (because for me the best outcome would be everyone putting the earlier difficulties behind them and cracking on with what I believe is going to be an awesome pbp with a bunch of players who have some good skills and characters with a great amount of potential to be interesting for a long while, and finally because we are all lucky enough to have a dm who has clearly worked bloody hard on setting this up and is doing a great job so far.) can I say one thing that may or may not provoke a reaction. Clearly some people had a issue with AA calling out "inner monologue" posting earlier in the game, well I didn't say anything then (possibly should have done) but I agreed, there was too much of it and it was a bit annoying - since that post, whatever your take on it was, the posting has been significantly better, characters have interacted with each other, a lot of detail about people has been "verbalised" rather than "internalised (?)" and therefore we can honestly use them as platforms from which to roleplay. Whatever the upshot of the argument above I hope people see that difference I'm trying to highlight and I think that AA was right to try to bring it to our attention.
One last thing, something I've really liked about this campaign, which I don't recall experiencing in any of the other 20+ games I've played here on the site is that the character group didn't immediately try and be best friends - it wasn't pistols at dawn but there were tensions, and this is a good thing between characters, it provokes us into doing better, going deeper with the roleplay, it's the reason I'm here - it could take a year for me to get Conor up to level 4 and I wouldn't care if the rp was good. The only thing that matters is that the dynamics are about the characters not the players, let's not spoil something and let's have our characters do their thing, whatever that is.
Vhon - Level 2 Warlock - What shall become of the Drunken Sailor?
Lyreis - Level 6 Elf Fighter - Eberron: Omega
DM - Dzenda: The Cracks - DM - Dzenda: Whispered Tales
It looks like you've gotten yourselves into something of a tiff whilst I've been away this weekend, so I'd like to offer my opinions as DM. Despite numbering my opinions, they are not in response to the numbering done by any previous posters.
Everything that Phadeout said in the post above mine stands; and the way he has phrased it has allowed me to shorten my reply considerably for fear of repetition, so thank you for that. Culture on the internet has widely become automatically hostile, but we're here to have fun and play some D&D. Prior to starting, Laserwhit expressed that he wasn't comfortable with swearing, and everybody has respected that - which is fantastic. Keep up the respect, and put this argument behind you. I will message Barlow, and invite him back now that I've had my say. If he chooses to return, fantastic. If not, then we move on.
Finally, does anybody else have any grievances to share? Now is the time, I implore you. I will have to forgo making a post in the campaign thread today, as I have work to do and have already spent enough time formulating this reply. If I have a productive day, I may be able to post tonight, but expect it tomorrow.
I hope that we can all work past this without losing any more members, you've so far all been great players, and I feel disconcerted by this sudden disagreement.
"The most important step a person can take is always the next one." - Dalinar Kholin; Oathbringer
I apologize for my part on this and I do not hold any grudges. I love this game and I realize my honest curiosity has riled people up. I want to know more about characters to understand who to play off them better which I guess in the end is a little meta and blew up in my face. I appreciate people giving me the benefit of the doubt that my intentions were misinterpreted. I truly think this campaign is one of the most unique on the board or I wouldn't have tried for it. Everyone should know that I never intend my comments or queries intagonistically but curiously or as a bit of fun. I never have made a decision about tone over the internet because of such things. Unless you've used obvious language to make me think otherwise I'm always going to consider your intentions are good because we're all playing a game for fun. As for character's behavior will/can only be interpreted as its written or as a PCs backgrounds dictates. If we're sitting around a table or around the world looking at a screen regardless of our difference we all love this game and want it to be the best game possible. I think that's the real argument here.
I never intended to offend, just help or joke. I think I've explained my character's intentions ad nauseam too so I won't again but from here on out my questions and comments are honest and have good intentions. As for my jokes may they be funnier/discernable or may I never roll another Nat 20 again. Seriously sorry Mojake.
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.
Just to put in my 2 cents.
I'm sad to see Barlow leave and I'm hoping we can get past this speed bump and continue some awesome roll playing in Mojake's very creative world. I appreciate the heart felt thoughts and concerns expressed and several of you have said things better than I would have so let's take the best of what has been advised and forgive the rest or chalk it up to misunderstandings and move forward. We have some wonderfully creative people here and should be able to have a great time.
Just wanted everyone to know that I'm on board and hope we can enjoy the game.
Lot's of stuff ...
Barlow and Nschrock I apologize that you found my humor humorless and my help unhelpful. It was not intended to offend nor was my honest intentions to help/better understand character motivations meant to question your abilities as players. My words will always have good intentions because they are wholeheartedly meant to be helpful or funny or a learning curve for me as a player. What is this game if not an amalgamation of guidelines and ideas then a multi-view interpretation of those guidelines/ideas!
Now let's have fun.
Sometimes a Nat 1 tells a better story than a Nat 20 ever could.