Patreon LogoYour support makes Blue Moon possible (Patreon)

Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF) [Currently recruiting]

Which version of D&D are you most familiar with?

  • 2nd Edition or older

    Votes: 3 9.4%

  • 3rd

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 3.5

    Votes: 18 56.3%

  • Pathfinder

    Votes: 5 15.6%

  • 4th

    Votes: 1 3.1%

  • I haven't played any yet, but I'd like to learn.

    Votes: 5 15.6%
  • Total voters
    32
Scion-of-Stars

Scion-of-Stars

Planetoid
Joined
Aug 8, 2011
Location
The Milky Way
[Anyone interested in playing should go here.]

I'm more interested in playing a character myself, but if it comes to it I suppose I'd be willing to DM temporarily (if we decided to pass the DMing role around). I'm not sure if anyone on here is actually into system games, but if three+ people besides myself are down, then I'm sure we can make it work.

Basically what I have in mind is: a group of adventurers exploring the world together, dueling with monsters and savages, trying to further their own goals, etc (the usual). But unlike a typical, linear game of D&D, the heroes/heroines will occasionally bite off more than they can chew and find themselves compromised (lewdly) by horny monsters, perverted wizards, clothing-melting traps, yada yada. Needless to say it would involve a lot of non-consensual aspects. (Anyone play Lightning Warrior Raidy?)

I would probably play a female character, and it would be nice to have a creative and sadistic DM. Anyway, just throwing it out there to see if there's interest. If you have any questions then ask away.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

you know what this sounds like fun i'm in.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

oniwolf said:
you know what this sounds like fun i'm in.
Click to expand...

Splendiferous; now if we can just get a couple more we'll have something. I guess I'll throw it out there that, while 3.5 is my most familiar version, I'm quite interested in trying Pathfinder; straight 3.5 would be good, straight Pathfinder would be alright, and I'm also fine with mixing the two (they're largely the same as it is).

Here's a link to the Pathfinder system reference documents if anyone's interested in reading up: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

so are we just going to you vanilla D&D 3.5, or are we going to yous all the other 3.5 book?
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

Pathfinder would be easiest since they give out all their materials for free.

And the conversion between it and 3.5 is now pretty much non-existent and D&D actively killed the srd for 3.5.

I've played a few pathfinder games, they're alright but suffer from the same magic power creep as 3.5. Though that wouldn't be an issue consider this games focus.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

hmmmmmmm..... i never play Pathfinder, i all way play 3.5 but one time and that was 4th gin and i will never do that again.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

oniwolf said:
hmmmmmmm..... i never play Pathfinder, i all way play 3.5 but one time and that was 4th gin and i will never do that again.
Click to expand...

Pathfinder is virtually identical to 3.5. I'm just starting to learn about it myself, but it's pretty easy to jump into after having played 3.5. Check out the SRD a little; you'll see that they use all the same base classes and races (though they have some new ones too), with a few differences.

Ultimately it's really up to whoever decides to DM whether we use 3.5 or Pathfinder.

3.5's SRD can still be found in a few places, like: http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/resources/systems/pennpaper/dnd35/soveliorsage/home.html

Edit: Oh right, if we do use 3.5, I should definitely like to have access to all the official books (or at least a wide selection).
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

That's just the core stuff, I'm referring to all the splatter books.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

Ah. Master Impact makes a good point; unless everyone participating has access to all of the books being used, Pathfinder would probably be better. But again, DM's discretion.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

well if the DM's wont the books i can send all the books for 3.5.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

I would be interested in playing, although I have no experience playing D&D/PF online. I do know the rules quite well for both as I have played 3.5 for years and pathfinder for quite a while now.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

loveraiden said:
I would be interested in playing, although I have no experience playing D&D/PF online. I do know the rules quite well for both as I have played 3.5 for years and pathfinder for quite a while now.
Click to expand...

Excellent, looks like we're up to four people (maybe). More interest is absolutely welcome, of course.

What we need now is for someone to say "I want to DM". :dodgy:
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

I do have experience dm'ing pathfinder but none with d&d so if you help me I am here.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

I have plenty of experience playing pathfinder and a little dming. Though never in the established setting, we always created our own setting and just utilised the pantheon and some of the plot elements.

Do people have ideas for characters? It would help to determine a story line.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

I was thinking about being either a bard or an alchemist most likely human
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

@BlackRose: Pathfinder basically is D&D; it's a slightly modified 3.5, so there should be no trouble either way.

@Impact: I don't really know anything about the established setting anyway, and I'm used to original settings too, so there's no problem there.

I would probably play either a straight wizard or sorcerer, or a warrior of some sort, possibly a monk or ranger. Either way the character will probably have an isolated background, being either a natural wanderer uncomfortable in civilization, or someone with a scholarly and privileged childhood.

I have a thing for playing slightly exotic characters; I'd kind've like to play a half-vampire (Libris Mortis, 3.5), how do people feel about templates and having level adjustments?

Edit: Also I suppose I may as well mention that I'm not much of an optimizer, if that effects anything.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

I would be for it, there are a few templates I have wanted to play with
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

Not being an optimiser is a good thing I would say.

What would everyone's interest for starting lvl be?

I know somewhere I have the 3.5 books lying around; but there's already dhampirs in pathfinder for those that want to play half vampires.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

BlackRose said:
I dont have the 3.5 books
Click to expand...

Most seem to be available online as PDFs, here's Libris Mortis for reference.

Most templates like that should be totally compatible with Pathfinder, but slight modifications might need to be made in a few cases.

Edit: @Impact: I tend to prefer to start at low-ish levels; my vote is for no higher than 7. I'll have to go see if I can find the Pathfinder version.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

I will download the books later on tonight, going to the movies later.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

Hmm, I would be okay with it I suppose; don't really care either way, but it would be good to know if we are, for character background purposes. I've only gotten to try it once so far.
 
RE: Anyone up for a little smexy D&D? (3.5/PF)

If we are playing Pathfinder would it be alright if I tried one of the 3rd party classes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom