Has anyone tried to do D&D on here yet?

[Agent_Foxtrot]

For a while I’ve been toying with the idea of participating in a D&D game on this board. The players would all roll up characters and send them to the DM. Everyone would have to maintain the strictest integrity and report exactly what they roll (or the DM does all the rolls), but if organized correctly, could be a lot of fun.

Forgotten Realms 3.5, anyone?

[Oakminster]

Think What Exit and Elendil’s Heir do that, either here or elsewhere. I’ve been invited to join a few times, but pretty much all my gaming time is devoted to WoW.

[Peremensoe]

Role-playing on a message board would be incredibly labor-intensive.

[Bosstone]

It’s been done a few times. Here’s one such thread, which appears to be the sixth in a series, and I know I’ve seen a more recent one.

[kenobi_65]

@Oakminster

Think What Exit and Elendil’s Heir do that, either here or elsewhere. I’ve been invited to join a few times, but pretty much all my gaming time is devoted to WoW.

I’ve been playing in What Exit’s Middle-Earth game (based on 1E AD&D) for the past year (he runs it on another message board these days). It’s definitely a different feel from a face-to-face game, but it’s been a lot of fun.

[appleciders]

Yes, we do it over here. It’s been running just over three years now, with about half of the players original and about half who have joined since. I’m not sure if he considers his game “full” or not, but he’s certainly added players frequently in the past. There are a couple of other roleplaying games going on over there, including (warning: shameless plug!) a similar game that I’m recruiting for right now. You could start one here or there; I’d probably play.

[mlees]

I imagine it has a very different “feel”.

All the games I participated in was made fun by the jokes, wisecracks and ad-libbed spur of the moment (those not thought out) actions from the players. (“you do WHAT???”)

On a message board, a lot of these get filtered out, there isn’t as much feedback, and actions would primarily be better planned.

Am I correct in these assumptions?

[appleciders]

Generally. Though I do recall What Exit? having to make us all quit referring to the giant half-wolf the party Druid had tagging along as “Fluffy”, and a thirty-post hijack while the whole party tried to root groundhogs out of a farmer’s field.

[mlees]

@appleciders

Generally. Though I do recall What Exit? having to make us all quit referring to the giant half-wolf the party Druid had tagging along as “Fluffy”, and a thirty-post hijack while the whole party tried to root groundhogs out of a farmer’s field.

It reminds me of the time I had my players trying to capture some orange nose hooked wing bats, which were considered a delicacy in some noblemans court. Live, of course. Dead ones just aren’t the same.

Player: How much xp is a live bat?

DM: whatever I say it is, chum.

Player 2: They’re worth 15xp dead, as per the monster manual. Just sayin’.

DM: Not to the nobleman, so… not to you, either.

[Omi_no_Kami]

Just popping in to say that I’d play, if you want to try a game. ^^

[E-Sabbath]

I’m up for it. Though I’d like Pathfinder over 3.5.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/
But I can work with either.

[Omi_no_Kami]

Ooh, I’ve always wanted to play Pathfinder- I would be happy with 3.5 as well, but E-Sabbath’s suggestion sounds like fun.

[Autolycus]

I might be interested.

I’m still a bit bummed from the abrupt and anti-climactic end of “The Fighting Ignorants” Straight Dope thread. It was exactly what the OP is asking for.

In fact, I think I’ll bump it and see if it’s not impossible to get things going again.

http://boardstest.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=560241&page=14

[BigT]

I’d be more likely to play another forum RPG: D&D is just not my thing, based on what I’ve read.

[Love_Rhombus]

I’d play, but I have the handicap of knowing almost absolutely nothing about D&D and working the swing shift.

[appleciders]

What is Pathfinder, exactly?

[E-Sabbath]

Basically, (and check the link in my previous posting), it’s a revision of 3.5, as done by the people who used to run Dungeon and Dragon magazines. It’s more of a 3.75 than what was created as 4th Edition. Completely compatible with 3.5, fixes most of the combat rules… grapple is now easy to do. Adds some modularity to character classes. Check out the Barbarian. You can make a dedicated anti-magician smasher, or a totem spirit powered seeker of the wild. Generally, it’s a final house rule patch. I like how it plays.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/ This is the System Reference Document for Pathfinder. There’s a player’s guide and some bestiaries and so on, but this actually contains most of both the basic and advanced player’s handbooks. Including some really nice alternate character classes from the APH. Oh, and it un-front-loads some classes, and makes sure there’s reasons to play, for example, Rogue all the way to 20, if you feel like it. Instead of them being, well, mostly useless past 10, since the wizard can do it all better.
http://www.amazon.com/Pathfinder-Roleplaying-Game-Core-Rulebook/dp/1601251505/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1301768785&sr=1-1
Here’s the core rulebook on Amazon.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Unleash Your Hero! | Paizo
And here’s their real webpage. It’s been generally well received.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game - Wikipedia
Here’s Wikipedia on it.

The hit die for each class is tied to the base attack bonus progression (except for the barbarian's d12), meaning the bard, ranger, rogue, wizard and sorcerer all have bigger hit dice, improving the survivability of these classes, especially in low level games.
The rules for non-damaging "combat maneuvers" such as trip, disarm and bull rush, which are slow and complex in 3.5, are simplified and unified. Characters simply have a Combat Maneuver Bonus (CMB) which they roll against the defender's Combat Maneuver Defense (CMD).
Polymorph spells are greatly simplified, with new groups of spells such as beast shape N and elemental body N replacing the 3.5 wild shape rules. Shape changing characters are no longer effectively required to maintain separate character sheets for each of their different forms, nor frequently consult the Bestiary. The changes also counter the fact that, in 3.5, wild shape and other shape changing abilities became more useful with each new monster book.
The skill system is simplified, as are the multi-classing rules. Characters simply get a +3 bonus for trained class skills; characters receive skill ranks instead of points, which they can invest equally in class and cross-class skills. Several groups of skills are merged, such as Listen, Search and Spot (now just Perception).
Characters never lose experience. Crafting does not require XP, and XP costs for spells are replaced by suitably expensive material components; while level loss is replaced by permanent negative levels, which are expensive to cure. In addition, there is no XP penalty for multi-classing; this penalty for taking many classes is replaced with a benefit of extra skill ranks or hit points for taking one class.
Characters die less easily: a character dies at a number of negative hit points equal to his Constitution; stabilization happens on a DC 10 Constitution check; and the threshold for death from massive damage is higher for characters with more hit points.

[appleciders]

That does seem like fun. I’d vote for Pathfinder, too.

[What_Exit]

Good luck, it can work well. It is time consuming for the Ref but not really for the players. I ran my Middle Earth Game here for over a year and then moved it to Mellophant. Mainly as I could post maps inline and have edit privileges there in the RPG forum.

[Miller]

I’ve been running a Pathfinder campaign for the last year and a half to two years now. Wouldn’t mind the opportunity to play it from the other side of the GM screen.