I think it is kind of slow around here...(postponed)

[crazy_monkey1956]

I've been working on a house ruled version of the monster classes that puts them on a more equal footing with standard classes.

The way they work by the book, they are meant to emulate the creature as it appears in the Monster Manual by the time you reach the end of the progression.

The basic premise I've been working with is that you don't need to match the Monster Manual entry in order to play a character with the flavor of that monster.

 

[HolyMan]

Well and now we are not slow at all. LOL

You all agree as a group on character gene/setting/game style

And I will let you know about starting gold and game length.

HM

 

[crazy_monkey1956]

Characters: Evil and monsters are good for me. I'm open to other stuff, though. The only thing I'm set on is starting at level 1.

Setting: Negotiable.

Game Style: Negotiable.

 

[Scratched_back]

I'll make it easy... I'd love to do Ravenloft, everything else I'm totally easy on.

Whatever, however

 

[HolyMan]

Well and now we are not slow at all. LOL

You all agree as a group on character gene/setting/game style

And I will let you know about starting gold and game length.

HM

EDIT: Wow a double post two posts late, interesting.

 

[Scratched_back]

I have never played Ravenloft but if you guys tell me how much reading i must do to get the hang of the setting, count me in! I've always wanted to check it out.

I've never played it either, but I know it's based on the stereotypical Dracula/Transylvania setting. Also, there are two Ravenlofts, really. The first is the classic stand-alone module in which the party somehow get transported to a gloomy castle in a gloomy land and hilarity ensues, the other is the actually a campaign setting in its own right with multiple different modules available. That's pretty much all I know, I just always liked the sound of it. I'm actually avoiding learning any more about it so that I can play through it without accidentally meta-gaming.

So an evil/monstrous, 1st level, 3.5 campaign is sounding good, HM! How would people feel about some character customisation, too? Like in HM's Off to War campaign rules. Having just generated a character through them myself, I love it! Just means that you can flesh out any concept you may have for a character fully, instead of carrying some deadwood in irrelevant skils and abilities.

 

[GandalfMithrandir]

Ravenloft would be OK for me, but I do not have the campaign setting (yet).

I will make my character kind of like Silas in the davinchi code, he is evil and does evil stuff, but he feels bad about it, eventually.

 

[Scratched_back]

I'm completely stumped as to what I'd play actually. I'm playing a bard in one game (Run by CM) and a Sneaky Rogue/Ranger type bloke in another game (Run by HM, oddly enough), so as long as I don't play those again, I'm easy. Cleric, Paladin, Magic User of some sort. Whatever is left when everyone else has picked.

HM, how do you feel about Psionics? I've never actually read the books, I've got no idea how they work, my local groups all banned them for being ridiculously powerful, but I may get the Expanded Psionics Book (which WotC claims re-balanced them) and see how they feel - just for something different.

 

[renau1g]

I'd be up for an evil game, regardless of game system, especially if I can be a lovable rapscallion Troll, or some other monster.

Ravenloft may be playable as an evil monster game, but as its already so dark, we may be better served by a more happy environment, like Greyhawk or 3.5e FR, so that way our evil deeds are even more evil "Bwa-hahaha"

 

[crazy_monkey1956]

Evil characters in Ravenloft, however, allow us to explore getting trapped there by our own deeds, experiencing our own personal brand of Hell set up by the Dark Powers.

I'm thinking of playing a flesh golem via monster class. That is my initial thought. I can go with something else if there's a need in the group.