The Creator

Originally Posted By: Ephesos However, there is something that's been bothering me. If you're going to participate in this campaign, you have to check the boards. Thankfully, most people have been good about this, but really, I'm getting tired of people claiming they are available only to be mysteriously absent the night of the session. It is quite possibly more annoying than a spastic internet connection. I would like to offer my apologies for this to Ephesos and everyone else that was expecting me. Because I don't frequent the boards regularly, some real life changes were enough to make me forget about it until today. Again, sorry. Regarding scheduling, what would be the minimum number of missing players in a session that could be arranged?

REGISTER THE CREATOR YES

Crap. I don't think I'll be able to make it. Because of the time difference that's actually on Saturday for me, and I'll be attending a wedding.

Hmm. I'm not sure I've translated the time into my timezone properly. Can someone give me an estimate on how long until the game starts?

I should be able to make it, as long as the time isn't outrageous for me.

I think I'd like the second adventure. I've a fondness for dark tales, and Sss-Tkss would certainly have reason to be investigating a shady port town.

Wow. This went off topic fast.

Are all those square brackets really neccesary? Why not use periods (.) to separate empty space? EDIT: Modified my suggestion a little. Here's an example. I think it's a lot easier to read. Code: -*-A_B_C_D_E_F_G_H_I_J_K_L_01[ . . . . . . . . . . . ]02[ . . . .T. . . . .T. . ]03[ . .T. . . .*. .a. .T. ]04[ . . . . .b. .T. . . .*]05[T. . .T. . .c. . . . . ]06[ . .T. . . . . . . .T. ]07[ . . . . . . . . . . . ]08[ . . .*. . . . . . . . ]09[ . . . . . . . . . . . ]10[ .T. . . . . . . .*. .W]11[ . . . . .3. . .T. . .W]12[ . . .1. . . . . . .W.W]13[ . . . .2. . . . . .W.W]14[ . .*. . . . .T. .W.W.W]15[ . . . .4. . . .W.W.W.W]

I wouldn't mind giving this a try. I may not be able to fit in with others however, since I live in Australia, and only really have weekends free.

Really? Damnit. I was really hoping to read it. Good authors are so hard to find.

The Shanker "May target you or another person with one of the following statuses: Blessed, Protected, Resistant, or Warded" I checked the rules, and there doesn't seem to be an entry for 'Warded'. 'Protected' seems to be what 'Warded' used to be.

It was about the only thing of signifgance I did in the entire game. No one trusted me, and without the warding ability I had nothing to offer to anyone. Being able to determine if two players were enemies might have helped if I actually had some way of stopping them from killing each other. Being difficult to kill did save me from being poisoned, but I would have much prefered a more proactive ability. Alternately, changing the victory condition so that it was more about saving lives, rather than thwarting goals could be good too, but I'm not entirely sure how to do that in a balanced way. Perhaps the Shanker should need to have done some task for each Player dead at the end of the game. (accumulate gold? prevent 1 death for every 2 kills?)

People, I have reason to believe that Dikiyoba is in fact the Fae. Do not trade with her if you value your life.

Ok this death toll is getting too much. I'm the Shanker, and if anyone thinks they need protection they can contact me, and I'll see what I can do.

Open Blades of Exile. Since BoE was made open source, people can now download it for free.

So get them to try out OBoE. By the time they're done with that they'll be utterly hooked.

I saw the topic on this at Shadowvale, but I can't post there. (darn you new kids with your new forums I'm not registered to) I'm not really going to be able to help, except to make a brief suggestion. (I won't be hanging around very long) BoA's (and BoE's) strength is not in the graphics, and some people will not give then a look simply because of this. What you need to do is go to the people who are willing to look past this. But who are these people? You can find them playing other games with old graphics, in particular, Roguelikes. A quick search on google will bring up a half dozen forums devoted to them. Their focus is similar enough that they shouldn't have any problems with another game being promoted there, and they're much more likely to actually get interested. Well, that's my suggestion. You guys can decide what to do with it.

It's been too long since I played it, so I don't know. The only thing I can think of is move mountains. Wait a sec... DM2 features a kind of attackable terrain setup. if there are are any levers or buttons you can see but can't reach, try shooting them.

I like what you are doing here. Will you try it for BoE later? I'm curious to see how my scenarios would fare (very badly I suspect). I always kinda expected the player would be using save/reload to get an advantage, and built my scenarios to give them a challenge despite that.

As an alternative to the protections proposed for the Shanker so far, allow me to suggest that she be able to set her immunity to whatever she likes as an ability use. The Anama can still attack her, but without knowing her immunity for certain. Wand of Death still kills, of course, but first the Anama have to get it, and then they have to use it on someone who does not actually need, or even really want, them dead. Shanker should still be a target of the anama, but not a neccessary one. Hmmm. I'm not entirely happy with this proposal. Let me give it some more thought. EDIT: Ok, a thought. Miklebur victory condition changed to "All Mages Dead, OR Anama priest wins" (or some similar variation). This means the anama can win without killing at all (in theory), as long as the priest is alive. If the priest dies, however, the Miklebur goes on a vengeful killing spree. It also solves to problem of the Miklebur causing alliance difficulties.

Originally Posted By: Thuryl Now that's an idea that could produce some interesting strategies. Ideally, you'd want to pick a target with no natural allies and neutralise him while making sure to ally with his enemies and ask them to please not kill him. For example, if you knew that an Anama Hunter existed in the game, one viable strategy would be to ally with the Anama and latch on to the Hunter like a limpet for the rest of the game to prevent him from killing anybody. Or he could try to ally with the Gladwell and neutralise the Micklebur. This is actually even better than killing him, since the priest could ressurect him. JKust occured to me that our alliance could have happily used a pacifist last game to neutralise Bain at the end. EDIT: Originally Posted By: Celtic Minstrel But doesn't the game end when all survivors have fulfilled their victory conditions? So, if the Pacifist's two targets are alive, and their victory conditions are mutually exclusive, they cannot both have satisfied their win conditions, and so the game continues. Or.... hmm... are you saying simply that they must survive as long as possible? EDIT: The game ends after seven days, if it hasn't ended before then. In order to win, the pacifist would need to keep the game going that long. And no, that isn't really viable, since once more than x deaths have occured it becomes unwinnable for the pacifist. This was, in fact, the original win condition proposed for the pacifist, but Stareye didn't like it.

Is possession or trading of skribbane a crime? EDIT: Is gladwell considered a criminal if he compells two murders, or do the servants take the rap?

Making an alliance with anyone is always a risky business. The best defence is make sure he has no reason to want you dead.

'He is not informed which party perpetrated the act.' He will when the act was murder. You see that guy there, the dead one? I'm guessing the other one was the murderer.

She?