|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Mar 12, 2016 8:28:31 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 12, 2016 16:27:12 GMT -6
Very interesting. I'll need to check this out!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2016 3:20:34 GMT -6
That's cool.  Though Kingmaker seems really, really long for a PBP... |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 13, 2016 4:49:42 GMT -6
Sadly, I totally misunderstood this from the get-go. I thought everyone was talking about the Kingmaker board game by Avalon Hill, not the pathfinder RPG arc.  |
|
|
|
Post by Vile Traveller on Mar 13, 2016 5:08:59 GMT -6
Sorry about that, Fin! But hey, in BLUEHOLME™, how bad can it be?  It sounds like there are major changes to the original, so I have no expectations set in stone. I don't know what the original was like, anyway, except that my face-to-face gaming group still raves about it (they finished it just as I joined them). |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Mar 13, 2016 7:47:18 GMT -6
Sorry about that, Fin! But hey, in BLUEHOLME™, how bad can it be? Oh, it's probably an excellent campaign. I know that I've heard good things about Pathfinder's "Kingmaker" plot arc, and of course BLUEHOLME™ is uber-awesome ... it's just that I had this mental image of the wargame and thought that someone was doing a role-playing and wargame blend. Kind of a Pendragon thing but using BLUEHOLME™ to fight out the combats instead of the wargame's combat system. That kind of thing. (I used the Kingmaker wargame for a play-by-post back in the 1980's and we had a blast but never got anywhere near finishing it....) |
|
Though Kingmaker seems really, really long for a PBP...
