Sounds like a simple job, and I could always use more gold. Change of scenery wouldn’t hurt either…yeah, why the hell not?
Fate has a way of springing unforeseen surprises upon even the most wary…
Hey everyone, I’m Doby, and I’ll be the DM for this campaign. I’ve been a member of Myth Weavers for little while, and in that time I’ve been thoroughly impressed with the community here. I’ve been playing AD&D through the various editions since I was young, so for 20+ years now. I am not so concerned with the experience my players have as much as I am their enthusiasm and ability to communicate effectively. I have a lot to say to potential players, so prepare yourself for some reading…
As a DM, you can expect that I’ll put an honest and sincere effort forth at all times and promise to have fun while doing it, and I expect nothing less from any player who makes it into my game. I plan on posting a minimum of 3 times per week, and expect the same commitment from my players. But wait, Mr. GM, can I/you post more than that? Absolutely! I have found that as weeks and months of a game pass, posting rates fluctuate. As an example, many games I have taken part in often begin at a fast pace, and as the novelty of a new game starts to wears off the posting rates frequently decline. Sometimes this decline is minimal, and other times it precipitates a game’s death. By setting the posting minimum at 3/week, I feel any committed player who is enjoying the game can maintain this rate and not feel as though they’ve fallen behind in the game should real-life happen and leave them unable to post for a few days. It also serves as an indicator of sorts; if you can't maintain such a minimal posting rate, it shows me that you are probably losing interest in the game.
This will be a sandbox style campaign taking place in a homebrew world of my creation. I’ve spent a good amount of time creating and fleshing out this campaign, and I fully expect it to be enjoyable for those who get to run through it. I will rarely, if ever, point the party in one particular direction exclusively. My goal is to continually present new opportunities and paths, and to allow the party to decide which direction they want to go in. As for game play style, I have designed this campaign so that the party should be able to avoid combat at in at least 75% of the designed encounters (as opposed to random encounters, which are present) during adventures if they have the skills and inclination to do so. Alternatively, if the group decides they want to constantly test their strength in battle I am prepared for that eventuality as well, though I find play-by-post games can often get bogged down when there is too much focus on combat.
Any alignment is technically permissible, but you must play well with others. I prefer PCs that have realistic moralities which are constantly developing much more than characters who only act like either shining beacons of pure heroism or dark and sinister villains. Rarely are things as cut and dry as “pure good” or “pure evil”; life is about the different shades of gray, and the PCs will be experiencing that. That's not to say that good or evil alignments are not allowed, just that if you're 'good' you'd better have some quirks or foibles, and if you're 'evil' you'd better have some redeeming qualities. I enjoy PCs that wrestle with moral conflicts, have faults, and that grow and change with the choices they make.
This is a moral dilemma, and I will do my best to see that the PCs experience as many of these as possible. There will be choices to make, and consequences to deal with.
If you're looking for a game where the party charges in and single-handedly defeats the BBEG and his army, then look elsewhere. This game will be low-level, low-magic, gritty, and challenging; expect to use your wits as much as your swords, and expect your enemies to do the same.