Shemmy's Planescape Storyhour #2 (Updated x3 10-17-07)

[Tristol]

More sane, and without the chaos, and without the good.
She actually showed up in a oneshot game I ran for NC gameday V I think it was. The concept originally was a more stable, less ethical nisha. They succeed in spades and it's going to be a really fun PC to watch.

I'm enjoying it so far, so we'll see how it goes. It's a decided turn from my normal character lineups, so hopefully it works out. In essence, she's certainly not of the good variety that Nisha was, and certainly more level-headed, but the touch of chaos is there. I think everyone has their moments.

Given my lack of reception to the previous diary I created for Tristol, it's somewhat unlikely I'll try a diary this time around. Besides, Ankita's player has sort of taken up the mantle in that regard. You'd need to bug her to see if she's into sharing it with the world at large. And on the same note, it would be unlike Inva to actually keep a diary anyway. The whole 'no one needs to know what you're up to or what you did' thing comes into play there. I will point out that I do occasionally get ideas stuck in my head that require writing up. If that happens, with the appropriate amount of coercion I can be persuaded to post them here. We'll see what happens.

On a lighter note (and of ideas getting stuck in my head), once the other story hour gets to the closing point (a long way off) I've got a conclusion for Tristol I'll post. Less of an end and more of a 'what he was up to' in the 150 years between games. Written in the third person point of view instead of the first person the diary was in. So it's a bit of a change for me.

 

[Clueless]

On the other hand. I'm doing art.

 

[Gez]

Hello everybody, little hi-jack: some of you (especially Shemmie and Tristol) might be interested in looking at this thread.

 

[Soullessweare]

Heya, have been reading your first storyhour faithfully, I guess it will be the same with this one.

Seems you are kind of DM that gets parties together on a 'mysterious unvoluntary basis'. I never do, but I can see the benefits, especially with the 'epic' campaigns you're playing. Regarding that, I was wondering, do you give your players some lines along which to design their characters? Alignment, personality etc?

 

[Gez]

I like how everyone agreed that the Fool's door would be the less dangerous. Reading that, I felt like I heard Fate laughing and snickering "suckers!" while pointing at them.

I pity the fools.

 

[Clueless]

Seems you are kind of DM that gets parties together on a 'mysterious unvoluntary basis'. I never do, but I can see the benefits, especially with the 'epic' campaigns you're playing. Regarding that, I was wondering, do you give your players some lines along which to design their characters? Alignment, personality etc?

Not really actually. At least *he* doesn't. This is the same group of players who have been playing for years together now. We're all friends - so we all pretty much want to share the stage and let others enjoy the stage as well, which works pretty well. SH #2 has a lot stronger personalities (not the least because we know it'll be a long term game, not a one shot as we thought SH #1 would be).

The most inner group collaboration we did was to make sure we were balanced enough that we had all the skills and classes we needed without stepping too heavily on each others toes. Lots of people wanted wizard this time, not too many wanted tank status. I think the only thing we're missing is someone who's actually lighthearted. Victor may qualify though.

As for personality compatibility - that'll be tricky this go around. Some of the personalities will fit better than others and watching them fall together is actually going to be one of the more interesting parts of this game. There are no *utter* incompatibilities (I wanna play Tanarri! I wanna play Baatazu!), no one wanted to do that so that problem didn't come up. What we're watching for right now is to make sure that we don't end up playing our characters true to self, and ourselves into a corner - where the only reason to Not bump a party member is 'PC glow'. We have managed to RP a character out of playability int he last SH after all.

I like how everyone agreed that the Fool's door would be the less dangerous. Reading that, I felt like I heard Fate laughing and snickering "suckers!" while pointing at them.
I pity the fools.

Actually - ironically it probably *was* one of the safer ones. One thing you learn after playing under Shemmie for awhile is how to interpret his clues. You think so far into them and then you learn where to stop because you're overthinking. It's nice when you've learned a DM to that point where the clues can actually be *useful*. Watch for something simular to this scenario coming up in the SH#1.

 

[Gez]

We have managed to RP a character out of playability int he last SH after all.

The "suicice-by-DM" succubus, or something that hasn't been written yet?

Actually - ironically it probably *was* one of the safer ones. One thing you learn after playing under Shemmie for awhile is how to interpret his clues. You think so far into them and then you learn where to stop because you're overthinking. It's nice when you've learned a DM to that point where the clues can actually be *useful*. Watch for something simular to this scenario coming up in the SH#1.

Reverse psychology? Had I been the DM, it would have been some sort of trapped dead-end with a "Told ya so!" glyph for those surviving the trap.

 

[Clueless]

The "suicice-by-DM" succubus, or something that hasn't been written yet?

Not writen yet. And trust me - you'll recognize it when you see it. It actually *has* been referred to on the boards before...

Reverse psychology? Had I been the DM, it would have been some sort of trapped dead-end with a "Told ya so!" glyph for those surviving the trap.

I think Shemmie as a DM isn't willing to go that route - that might destroy a lot of DM to player trust - and with stories like his you *have* to trust that the DM is backing you even if the Big Bads aren't - or you'd get too depressed/angry to continue to play.

 

[Shemeska]

Heya, have been reading your first storyhour faithfully, I guess it will be the same with this one.

Seems you are kind of DM that gets parties together on a 'mysterious unvoluntary basis'. I never do, but I can see the benefits, especially with the 'epic' campaigns you're playing. Regarding that, I was wondering, do you give your players some lines along which to design their characters? Alignment, personality etc?

I just don't like the 'So you're all sitting in a bar...' sort of campaign starts. Had too many bad experiences with those. Plus, initially forcing them into a situation gives them a later reason to continue working with one another outside of 'we're the PCs, and while I don't know you nor do I trust you, we're working together for no specific reason'.

 

[Shemeska]

Reverse psychology? Had I been the DM, it would have been some sort of trapped dead-end with a "Told ya so!" glyph for those surviving the trap.

Not my style. Now I'm all for irony, but I don't view the game as a DM versus PCs thing at all. I won't go out of my way to intentionally screw over a character, but neither will I go too terribly out of my way to save you from the consequences of anything you do. Hit on a fiend and you get what comes to you, spit in the eye of a wealthy noble and the same, etc.

Plus, the setup of the traps and everything else in the 'dungeon' (for lack of a better term) for this second campaign was hardly random and hardly there just to kill people for the sake of killing them.